Google
This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at |http : //books . google . com/|
,\TYO/>,
'^^RAP^^^^
THE HISTOgy,-,-
OF THE
ENGLISH PARAGRAPH
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF
ARTS, LITERATURE, AND SCIENCE, OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, IN CANDIDACY
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR
OF PHILOSOPHY
BY
EDWIN HERBERT LEWIS
CHICAGO
1894
LGIJL
CONTENTS.
Preface .-.--.. ^. . . 5
CHAPTER I.
The Mechanical Signs of the Paragraph 11
CHAPTER II.
Rhetorical Theories of the Paragraph ..... 20
CHAPTER III.
Paragraph- Length and Sentence-Length - - - - - 34
CHAPTER IV.
Recent Investigations in Prose- Form: their Bearing on the His-
tory of the Paragraph ---.... 52
CHAPTER V.
Alfred to Tyndale ...... ... 55
CHAPTER VI.
Tyndale to Temple .-...-.. 75
CHAPTER VII.
Temple to De Quincey - - - - - - - -104
CHAPTER VIII.
De Quincey to Holmes -.---. . . 137
CHAPTER IX.
The Prose Paragraph : Summary - - - - - 169
Bibliography ..-....-- lyg
APPENDIX.
Notes on the Verse Paragraph of Middle English - - - 185
3
PREFACE.
Historically considered, the word paragraph means (a) a
marginal character or note employed to direct attention to some
part of the text ; {d) a character similar to (a), but placed in the
text itself ; (c) the division of discourse introduced by a paragraph
mark or by indentation, and extending to the next paragraph
mark or the next indentation ; (d) the rhetorical paragraph, that
is, (c) developed to a structural unit capable of organic internal
arrangement.
The plan of the present essay is to discuss, in the first chapter,
(a) and (d) and other mechanical signs of the paragraph ; in the
second chapter to introduce (c) for the purpose of further defi-
nition ; in the next seven chapters to show the historical devel-
opment of (c) in English prose, first by a statement of the general
development, then by a particularized account according to
periods, then by a summary of this account; lastly, in an appen-
dix, to offer a few incomplete notes on the development of (c) in
Middle English verse.
It is a pleasure to acknowledge here my indebtedness, first to
Professor W. D. McClintock, who approved the choice of subject,
and made most searching and suggestive comments upon the whole
course of the treatment ; and to Professors F. A. Blackburn, W.
C. Wilkinson, and A. H. Tolman, for many helpful criticisms.
Professor L. A. Sherman, of the University of Nebraska, gener-
ously furnished me with certain statistics, noted in the text by the
parenthesis (Sherman). Mr. G. W. Gerwig, of Allegheny, Pa.,
kindly supplied me in advance with the results of his research
concerning the decrease of predication, — research pursued under
Professor Sherman's direction. I have quoted freely from his
results, using as reference mark the parenthesis (Gerwig). In such
5
6 PREFACE.
cases the expression " clauses saved " needs a word of explana-
tion. Mr. Gerwig says :
" The manifest effect of such verb suppression is a lightening
of the style of the authors engaging in it. A partial effort was
made to find out the line of this movement, but no complete
or final results were obtained. The number of clauses saved
by the substitution of present and past participles or by the use
of appositives was noted, and is made a systematic part of the
present exhibits. No especial value is claimed for the results,
except perhaps as an aid to later investigators This
exhibit of course includes only the verb suppressions through
aid of the simplest substitutes. That there has been a similar
saving by the use of verbal nouns, gerundive constructions, and
other devices will be apparent to any student."
I have made no effort to extend the line of investigation thus
indicated. But, since the matter concerns indirectly the develop-
ment of paragraph structure, I have quoted many of Mr. Ger-
wig's results on this point, as suggestive, though incomplete.
Professor W. I. Knapp, of this University, was good enough
to let me examine the rubrication in certain rare Romance texts
in his possession. To the authorities of the British Museum,
the Cambridge University Library, the Astor Library, and the
Newberry Library (especially Dr. Karl Pietsch) I owe repeated
courtesies. Two other friends, Mr. L. D. Thornton and Mr. W.
E. Moffatt, from time to time lightened for me the burden of the
numerical work ; one of these, Mr. Moffatt, interested himself in
the general theme, and called my attention to several enlight-
ening facts.
A discussion of the history of the paragraph must necessarily
concern itself chiefly with what De Quincey called the mechan-
ology of style. The danger in such study is that the method of
investigation may itself become mechanical. But, though no
other method is so mechanical as the numerical method, and
though I have wished to lay the chief emphasis upon the purely
rhetorical discussion, I have not been able to resist the tempta-
PREFACE, 7
tion to do a little counting. For the figures obtained I do not
wish to claim any significance that is not in them ;. they seem to
me interesting in themselves, and have proved to some extent
a means of testing conclusions reached by freer and more sym-
pathetic reading. Psychological meaning, too, they must have,
but I understand little of it. Had time permitted the making of
curves, from the tables in hand, to illustrate the exact course of
each author's numbers, these curves would have possessed far
more meaning than the system of averages I have had to use.
Manifestly, in employing a system of averages, one is constantly
in danger of implying more than he wishes to. For the mere
numerical average may not be the most important thing to know
in a given case ; the course of an author's fluctuations in sen-
tence length or paragraph length, may be the really significant
thing; and this matter of fluctuations I have not been able to
deal with adequately. Again, when, in the later chapters, refer-
ences are freely made to a given author's average paragraph length,
it must be remembered that in most cases only a small part of the
author's whole work serves as a basis of induction. The numer-
ical results are therefore avowedly tentative, and the interpretation
of them is often inadequate.
£. xx. L.
CHAPTER I.
THE MECHANICAL SIGNS OP^ THE PARAGRAPH.
The various signs of the paragraph, as they appear in English
manuscripts and English books, are a legacy from classical
scribes, and must be studied in the light of their origin.
The paragraph (irapaypaifxy; (ypafifiif), is the oldest mark of
punctuation in Greek manuscripts. It first occurs as a horizontal
stroke (sometimes with a dot over it), placed at the beginning
of a line, just beneath the first two or three letters. It indicated
that a sentence, or some longer division of the text, was ended in
the underscored line. The mark thus distinguished the close of
one section rather than the beginning of another.
Instead of the horizontal mark the wedge (BnrXrj), or the
hook (/co/owm), was occasionally employed. The terms SittXtJ
and Kopdivk are not carefully discriminated by lexicographers ; both
forms shown in Fig. i, in the accompanying cut, are called
BnrXrj, and at least the first form has been called KopwvU.
Later in Greek literature, the mark is used for other purposes.
It marks a spurious passage ; or it indicates, in the drama, a
change of persons in dialogue, chorus, or parabasis. Aristotle,
Rhet. III., 8, 6, says that the terminal paeon, ^ww-, should not
be determined by the paragraph {'n'apaypa<l>y) — a warning which
points to great frequency in the use of the mark. I cannot,
however, say whether Welldon is fully justified in his note on
the point : ** The ' marginal annotation ' (Grk. irapaypaftyrj, Lat.
inter diutus librarit) would answer to the modern full stop."*
In law 7ra/oay/oa</>i7 came to mean an exception taken by the
defendant to the indictment. In the later rhetoric 7rapaypa<l>ij
meant a brief summary. The sign used for a paragraph of this
sort in the Gortynian Codex of Private Rights is the cross shown in
' The Rhetoric of Aristotle, Trans. J. E. C. Welldon, p. 251.
9
lo HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
Fig. 2. The use of 7rapaypa<l>T^ to mean a summary indicates how
soon the word came to signify a division of discourse.
There were, among the Greeks, other mechanical devices for
indicating the paragraph. Roberts' mentions the use of the let-
ters of the alphabet, in an old Locrian inscription, to indicate
the successive divisions ; the letters were turned upon one side.
In the manuscripts the custom early arose of leaving a short space
after the last word of each paragraph. Very early also grew up
the habit of emphasizing the conclusion of a paragraph by points,
placed in the space referred to. Many English manuscripts show
the same device : as, a full point placed high,* or a colon and a
dash,3 Qj. three full points (.*.)•'*
Of the Greek marks, it was the Ko/owm, I take it, that sur-
vived, assuming the form of a gamma [Fig. 3];^ although the
hypothesis has been suggested*^ that the gamma stands for ypafifirj.
In later times this gamma underwent many modifications, though
it is usually possible to recognize in the variants the parent mark,
even as late as the sixteenth century. In the cut these changes,
for they can hardly be called steps in any evolution, are shown
in figures 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14 (?), 22, 23, 24, 25, 27
(second character). Fig. 8 is from the West Gothic forms given
by Wattenbach. Fig. 12 is from the Ormulum; fig. 13, from the
Harleian Leviticus. Walther gives 14, 22, 23, 24, 25, in the Z^;c-
icon Diplomaticutn, Fig. 14 is difficult to explain, and I am not
sure that it is a gamma at all. Fig. 17, though it seems to have
the force of a paragraph mark, is no easier to dispose of than 14.
The gamma in 27 is from a beautiful incunabulum by Ulrich
" An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy, p. 348.
^ E.g, Cotton MS., Vespasian A. viii., A. D. 966.
■^E.g. D'Orville MS. X. I. Inf., 2.30. Bodleian Lib., A. D. 889.
4 E.g. Cotton MS., Claudius B. iv. Early eleventh century.
^Cf. Isidor {Orig. I. 21) . . . " Paragraphus [Fig. 3] ponitur ad separandas
res a rebus." (Quoted in Wattenbach, Anleitung zur Lateinischen Paheographie,
P . 36.)
^ Cf. Liddell and Scott's Lexicon.
MECHANICAL SIGNS OF THE PARAGRAPH,
II
1\
1
r
c
/3
rr
r
d' < tjr
If
I^
iS
/^
/r
^0
If it
p^
ti
X7 ^> i^9
II
C
I
3X
T
^
30
c
PARAGRAPH MARKS.
12 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
Zell. On the page of chapter titles this mark alternates with
the thick character resembling a reversed D.
When one looks at the West Gothic form given in Fig. 8, the
question suggests itself, might not the modern mark ^ have
descended from the original gamma. It is probably the obser-
vation of this West Gothic mark, or some still more suggestive
form, that has led Mr. Maunde Thompson ' to say recently :
" Our modern ^ is directly derived from the simple ancient form "
[Fig. 3]. Mr. Thompson introduces no fact whatever in support
of this statement. There are surely definite objections to this
view, even if we can find more suggestive forms than Fig, 8. One
objection is that unquestionable variants of the gamma have per-
sisted side by side with the variants of the ^, and to a very late
date, as in the Ulrich Zell book mentioned. A more serious
objection is the fact that the form resembling a P (Fig. 4),
is found in very old Latin manuscripts. Now, if Mr. Thompson
can cite no transitional form (between the gamma and this ancient
P) more marked than Fig. 8, his^case is not strong. It is a
long step from the bold, oblique stroke of Fig. 8 to the care-
fully limited curve of Fig. '4. It seems much more rational, there-
fore, to believe that the P stood for " paragraphus ; " nothing
could be more natural for a Latin scribe than to substitute the ini-
tial letter of a word with which he was familiar, for the ancient
gamma, which seemed to him quite unrelated to the word it
represented.
This early Latin mark had been changed as early as 1127 to
the form in Fig. 1 1 ; whether to distinguish the sign from all let-
ters, or because the left curve is easier to make than the right, is
not clear. The change may have been hastened by the habit
which grew up in the twelfth (?) century, of placing the mark at
the left of the marginal line in poetry. The reason for the change
in this case would be the danger of the right curve impinging
upon the text.
In the years between 1127 and 1280 the long stem of the
^ Handbook of Greek and Latin Palceography^ p. 7 1 .
MECHANICAL SIGNS OF THE PARAGRAPH, 13
reversed P was gradually dropped, and the form shown in Fig. 1 5
resulted. A little later the long reversed P again came into
fashion.
The characters in Figs. 16 and 18 are developed from 15,
although the first form of 16 shows how nearly the gamma and
the Latin mark could be made to approach each other ; the
same resemblance occurs again in 28. Other variants of the P
appear in Figs. 19, 20, and 21, of which the first belongs to the
latter part of the fourteenth century, the second and third to the
first part of the fifteenth.
The ornamental form 26 is but one of many fanciful and
even fantastic shapes that grew up under the hand of the illu-
minator — forms which could not be shown to advantage here
without the aid of many colors. Indeed it should be remem-
bered that red and blue are the colors in which most of the
figures of the cut appear in the manuscripts or incunabula. The
list will show which are printer's types.
In certain manuscripts, as British Museum Additional Manu-
script, 15,580, the paragraph mark is not employed at all; its
place is taken by the parallel virgules, oblique.
The heavy-faced marks shown in 32 were the models of the
paragraph- type cast in Germany as early as 1477. Caxton began
in i483(?) to use a similar mark — 36. Down to this time, or
even till 1485, according to Mr. Blades,' Caxton employed a
rubricator (rubrisher), who inserted, in vermilion, paragraph marks
and initials. It was in the book called Quattuor Sermones XhsXYit
first employed a paragraph-type.
Fig. 29 shows how, by careless drawing, the modern reference
mark ^ was evolved. It is hardly to be supposed that the type
^ was deliberately meant to be, as Worcester's definition has it,
"Nothing more than a capital P reversed, the white part being
made black, and the black part white, for the sake of greater dis-
tinction." This modern type was used by English printers in
the sixteenth century. But a similar one was used, having only
^ The Biography and Typography of William Caxton^ p. 135.
14 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
one stem — Figs. 41, 43. These long-stemmed varieties were used
more as ornaments than as paragraph marks. By the middle of
the sixteenth century the paragraph mark had indeed almost
passed out of use except as a decoration, and when it was revived
it was as a reference mark. In editions of Latin and Greek
classics it was still retained, being placed in the text.
Indentation (German and French alined) was not an inven-
tion of the fifteenth century, nor yet of the fourteenth. Its
origin is often ascribed to the practice of leaving a blank space
to be filled with a capital by the illuminator. But why is it
necessary to assign such a reason for a device which really exists
in some of the oldest English manuscripts ? In a manuscript
of the sixth century (Cambridge University Library, 41), quota-
tions are written as in modern paragraphs, — carried in evenly
from the marginal line.
Perfect indentation in the modern sense, where the space of
a printer's em is left at the beginning of the new paragraph, is
to be found as early as 1482, in an incunabulum of Knoblocht-
zer.' Caxton made no indentations in the modern sense. But
he often spaced out the line before a new paragraph, and occa-
sionally left a space within the line to mark a new section of the
discourse — a sort of compound paragraph {cf. p. 28).
In the time of Caxton's successor, De Worde, the word para
graph had come to be applied, under the guise of pilcrow, not
only to the mark itself, but to the index [I^^J as well ' The
word itself had suffered corruption, first into paragrafte, and
then, according to Skeat, inXo pylcr of tej' At any rate, the word
pilcrow is common. Thus in Tusser, Five Hundred Points of
Good Husbandry (1557) :
" In husbandry matters, where pilcrow ye find,
That verse appertaineth to huswifery kind."
^ Oratio Habita in Synode Argent. Gailer von Kaiserburg, Strassburg
1482.
^ Indeed before Caxton's day we have pylcrafte meaning something other
than paragraph. Thus as early as 1440, in G^oHrty^ s Pro7nptorium Parvulomvi,
pylcrafte is defined as asteriskus.
MECHANICAL SIGNS OF THE PARAGRAPH. 15
The name pilcrow continued to be used till after the middle, at
least, of the seventeenth century. In " The New World of
English Words — or a General Dictionary, containing the Inter-
pretation of such hard words as are derived from other lan-
guages," 1658, we have this definition : "A Paragraphe (Greek),
a full head or title in any kind of writing ; as much as is com-
prehended in one section ; it is also called a Pillkrow."
One other use of the paragraph mark in the sixteenth cen-
tury should perhaps be mentioned, — a bookbinder's use. The
system of signatures, developed in the fifteenth century, gave a
letter to each signature, a Roman numeral being added to show
the page. Thus the first signature would be A, and its leaves,
Aj, Aij, Aiij, etc. The introductory section (preceding A) was
often marked ^i, ^ij, etc. If there was a second introductory
section, as a preface after the title pages and blank pages, it was
sometimes marked W\, TH U» ^^^•
After the establishment of indentation the method of mark-
ing paragraphs becomes essentially what we find it today. At
first the old mark was for emphasis occasionally added to the
indentation, as in Ascham now and then. But this custom was
short-lived. The paragraphs of the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries are often separated by wide spaces ; but this is a print-
er's convenience, and has no connection with the modern way of
double-spacing before an unusual break in the sense {cf, p. 29).
In the eighteenth century it was a printer's custom to print the
first word of each paragraph in capitals.
It remains to consider the origin of the so-called section
mark [§], called on the continent, paragraphe. The genesis of
this mark has been explained in two different ways. The first
of these is equally ingenious and ingenuous. It is thus
expressed in an American treatise on composition and rhetoric -.^
" The Section [§], the mark for which seems to be a combina-
tion of two s's, standing for signum sectionis, the sign of the
section." The theory is still more definitely expounded in
'Quackenbos, Course of Composition and Rhetoric, p. 145.
1 6 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
D. J. Hill's Elements of Rhetoric.^ "The Section [§] ... is
supposed to be derived from the Latin words, signum sectionis,
sign of a section, the two old-fashioned long /'/ being written
side by side, but finally one below the other." The only neces-
sary answer to this fancy is that the early section-type. Fig 30,
does not at all suggest the combination of two s's.
The second theory is that of Friedrich Blass, and must be
received with respect, though stated without defense or expla-
nation. Blass says (Ivan von Miiller's Handbuch der Klassischen
Alter thumswissenschaft, I., 332) : " Aus diesem Zeichen [the
gamma] erstant durch die Mittelform [Fig. 7] unser §." By
this he seems to mean that the hollow branch of the transitional
gamma [Fig. 7] developed into the long duplex circumflexus of
the old section mark.
It is hard to see how this can be. Whatever evolution the
form 7 would have gone through would naturally have been from
left to right, not vice versa. In fact the only form of the gamma
I have found that bears the slightest resemblance to the early
§ (Fig. 30) is Fig. 24, where the canny scribe has invented
a Tironian paragraph-mark by uniting the curve of the Latin
mark to the stem of a fully developed gamma. But surely 30
could never have come from. 24, and it seems next to impossible
for it to have come from 7.
The type 30 was used at Padua in 1473. I ^^.ve not found it
in earlier Italian books, though it may have been used. The
(rubricated) mark which does exist, however, and frequently and
conspicuously in Venetian books of .1474-1479, is the graceful
one shown in Figs. 31 and 33.
Why, then, should not 30 be an invention, perhaps between
1467 and 1473,' based on the beautiful first form in 31 ? A vari-
ant still nearer to 30 is 37, where but the slightest change is
needed to give a rude form of 30.
' D. J. Hill, Elements of Rhetoric^ p. 123.
^ No Roman or Venetian book that I have been able to examine shows a
paragraph-type in this period.
MECHANICAL SIGNS OF THE PARAGRAPH 1 7
My hypothesis then is, that the § is developed, not from the
gamma, but from the old P, the date of the final change being
approximately as indicated in the preceding paragraph.
SOURCES OF THE CUT.
1. Early Greek inscriptions. Mommsen, Res Gestce divi
Augustiy/p. 190.
2. Gortynian Codex of Private Rights.
3. Early Greek and Latin MSS. Wattenbach, Anleitung
zur Lateinischen Palceographte, p. 36.
4. Oldest Latin MSS. Wattenbach, Anleitung^ p. 36.
5. 804-820 A. D. S. Augustinus. Boulogne MS., 44.
6. 854-873 A. D. Rabanus Maurus. Munich Hofbibliotek.
Lat. 6262.
7. Date? Blass, in Ivan von MiiUer's Handbuch der Klass-
ischen Alter thumswissenschaft, I., 332.
8. Ninth century. West Gothic form. Wattenbach, Anlei-
tung, p. 36.
9. Tenth century. Berliner Bibliotek. MS., theol. lat. Fol.
481.
10. Eleventh century. Freiburger Universitatbibliotek. MS.
containing the Canonessamlung of Burchard von Worms.
11. 1 127 A. D. Regula S. Benedicti. British Museum Add.
MS. 16,979.
12. c. 1200 A. D. Ormulum. MS. Junius L
13. 1 1 76 A. D. Leviticus. Harl. MS. 3038.
14. 1265 A. D. In Walther, Lexicon Diplotnaticutn,
15. 1280 A. D. Miinchener Hof- und Staatsbibliotek, MS.
13,029.
16. Thirteenth century. French MS.
17. 1295 A. D. Comptes du Temple.
18. Thirteenth century. The Great Psalter, in Three Parts.
Paris, Biblioteque Rle.
19. Before 1400. Wiclifs Bible. MS. Douce 70.
20. c. 1400 A. D. Piers Plowman. MS. Laud Misc., 581.
1 8 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH
21. 1422 A. D. In Walther, Lexicon Diplomatic U7n.
22. 1435 A. D. In Walther, Lexicon Diplomatic um.
23. 1 44 1 A. D. In Walther, Lexicon Diplomaticum.
24. 1 44 1 A. D. In Walther, Lexicon Diplomaticum.
25. 1 44 1 A. D. In Walther, Lexicon Diplomaticum.
26. 1460-1465 A. D. Incunabulum, Quadrag. F. Leon. Ital.
27. 1470 A. D. Tractatus Diversi. Incunabulum, by Zell,
Cologne.
28. c. 1470 A. D. St. Bernard. Incunabulum, Strassburg.
29. 1472 A. D. Fr. Beneventura Breviloquium. Incunab-
ulum, Niirnberg.
30. 1473 A. D. '^yp^' Plcttea,Tabu la Restitutio num. Padua.
31. 1474. A. D. Duns Scotus, Scriptum in primum Sententi-
arum. Incunabulum, Venice.
32. 1477 A. D. Type. Jacobus de Cessolis, Schachzabelbuch,
Incunabulum by Heinrich Knoblocktzer, Strassburg.
33. 1479 A- ^' Carraciolo de Licio, Sacrce Theologice Magis-
tri Necnou Sacri, Incunabulum, Venice.
34. 1483 A. D. Deutscher Kalendar. Incunabulum by Kno-
blocktzer, Strassburg.
35. 1 48 1 A. D. St. Bernard, Epistolce. Incunabulum.
36. 1483 (?) A. D. Caxton, Quattuor Sermones, 6^^.
37. Date uncertain. A Latin incunabulum in the Newberry
Library, Chicago.
38. 1585 A. D. Type, used by East.
38 a. 1587 A. D. Alnick J., Meditations vpon Gods Mon-
archies and the Deuill his Kingdome, London, Gerred
Dewes.
39. Modern English "section mark," cB\\t(l para grap he hy
continental printers.
40. French variant of 39.
41. 1599 A. D. Type used by the firm of George Bishop,
Ralph Newberie, & Robert Barker.
42. 1491 A. D. Type. Mirabilia Urbis Romce. German
incunabulum.
MECHANICAL SIGNS OF THE PARAGRAPH, 19
43- 173^ A. D. Hugo, De Prima Scribendi Origine,
Trajecti ad Rhenum, mdccxxviii., p. 257. Quoted from
Pancirolus as "vetus ilia," thus: "Est autem nota
haec § et vetus ilia [Fig. 43] cujus ilia sit formae, novi
inventi, cum olim verba omnia in MSS. cohaerent, rari-
usque singula interpungeretur, et a seculo nono demum
distinctiones per spatia quaedam inter singulas voces
relicta obtinerent, etc."
CHAPTER II.
RHETORICAL THEORIES OF THE PARAGRAPH.
We have now examined, at rather tedious length, the general
history of the mechanical marks of the paragraph ; the rest
of our discussion must concern itself chiefly with rhetorical
qualities of the paragraph. Before we can proceed to trace
the history of this unit of composition, we must have a definition
of it, and a classification of its varieties. In this matter the long-
est way round is perhaps the shortest way home ; and to reach a
working definition and classification we will examine such defini-
tions and classifications as have already been made.
Until 1866, when Bain published his Manua/ of English Com-
position and Rhetoric^ the paragraph as a structural unit had
received from writers on rhetoric no serious attention. Camp-
bell had discussed sentence connectives in an indifferent sort of
way, and De Quincey had urged in more than one place the phi-
losophy of transition. But it is a little remarkable that the treatises
on rhetoric were so slow in coming to note the organic signifi-
cance of the paragraph ; that the theory of the teachers was so
many years behind the practice of the writers.
Bain's definition ran thus [§ 158] : "The division of discourse
next higher than the sentence is the Paragraph : which is a col-
lection of sentences with unity of purpose." Angus was more
specific, but less to the point : " A paragraph is a combination
of sentences, intended to explain, or illustrate, or prove, or apply
some truth; or to give the history of events during any definite
portion of time, or in relation to any one object of thought." '
Minto's Manual does not define. D. J. Hill says: **A paragraph
is a group of sentences that are closely related in thought."*
^ Handbook of the English Tongue, § 730.
* Elements of Rhetoric, ?• 7 1 •
20
RHETORICAL THEORIES OF THE PARAGRAPH. 21
McElroy : "A Paragraph is in fact a whole composition in minia-
ture, and sometimes constitutes a whole composition." ' Genung:
*' A paragraph is a connected series of sentences constituting the
development of a single topic."' A. S. Hill speaks of the para-
graph as "something more than a sentence and something less
than an essay ; ... an important means of marking the natural
divisions of a composition as a whole." ^ G. R. Carpenter quotes
Bain, Genung, and McElroy, and adds: "These definitions of
well-known writers on rhetoric all agree in making a paragraph
a series or combination of sentences, constituting an integral part
of a whole composition."^
Three writers have somewhat more definitely declared the
organic nature of the paragraph. These three, John Nichol,
T. W. Hunt, and Barrett Wendell, define the paragraph in terms
of syntax. Nichol,^ in a parenthesis, thus: "With regard to the
arrangement of sentences in a Paragraph — to which on a larger
scale the same laws apply as to the sentence — it may be remarked
that the best effect is generally produced when the long sentence
precedes and the short sentence follows, striking, as it were,
the nail on the head, and concentrating the sentiment which
has been previously followed." Hunt: — "a collection of sen-
tences unified by some common idea. It sustains the same
relation to the sentence which this does to the clause or mem-
ber. It is a structure of which completeness is a mark —
completeness of form and discussion."^ Wendell,^ after search,
finds in the books no definition that suits him, and says: "In
these straits, trying to make a definition for myself, I have
been able to frame no better one than this, whose comparative
^ The Structure of English Prose^ § 246.
' The Practical Elements of Rhetoric^ p. 193.
^Foundations of Rhetoric ^^, 325.
^Exercises in Rhetoric and English Composition^ Advanced Course, p. 153,
^Primer of English Composition, p. 103.
^ The Principles of Written Discourse, p. 82.
"^English Composition, p. 1 19.
22
HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
ll
form makes it at least suggestive : A paragraph is to a sentence
what a sentence is to a word." Hunt's definition comes nearer
to historical truth then WendelFs. But the latter writer, whose
definition would hardly be couched in such tropical terms if it
were meant to apply to the historical paragraph, does not pretend
to say that good use has necessitated this definition ; he is
rather speaking of a paragraph that ought to be.
The latest definition is that of Scott and Denney/ It is par-
ticularly important, since it emphasizes the idea that a good par-
agraph is, more properly than the sentence itself, an organic unit
of composition. Q^A paragraph is a unit of discourse developing
a single idea. It consists of a group or series of sentences closely
related to one another and to the thought expressed by the whole
group or series. Devoted, like the sentence, to the development
of one topic, a good paragraph is also, like a good essay, a com-
plete treatment in itself. "J
All the definitions tmis far given were framed primarily for
purposes of pedagogy. This may explain why so much stress
is laid upon the idea of a paragraph as a sentence group. It
hardly need be said that one of the trials of the teacher is
this, — that when a young mind is told to make paragraphs it
begins to paragraph each sentence. It proceeds by what might
be called impartial analysis, failing to distinguish the larger stadia
of the thought from the smaller.
The question, however, arises, whether the name of paragraph
can justly be refused to an indented sentence. Of the ten authors
quoted above, three admit the fact of the paragraph of one sen-
tence ; six ignore it ; one disputes it. Angus rather reluctantly
admits that "sometimes an author makes his paragraphs little
else than expanded sentences;"' and, unhappily, quotes Jeremy
Taylor by way of illustration. D. J. Hill follows Angus : " Some-
times an expanded sentence constitutes a paragraph ; "3 ^nd he
'^Paragraph Writing , p. I.
"^Handbook, § 735.
^Elements, p. 75.
RHETORICAL THEORIES OF THE PARAGRAPH, 23
quotes the same passage from Taylor, the reading of which would
be more certain to deter any student from constituting
a sentence a paragraph than would any exhortation. The
only whole-hearted recognition of the single sentence paragraph
is that of A. S. Hill : " If a paragraph complies with these funda-
mental requirements, it matters not whether it contain one
sentence or twenty."' The fundamental requirements here
referred to are those of unity, coherence, etc., and HilFs words
do not imply any previous discussion as to the proper num-
ber of sentences to the paragraph. The most recent discus
sion of the paragraph (and the most comprehensive), that of
Scott and Denney, refuses to recognize the single-sentence
paragraph ; in this it follows Earle, of whom we shall speak
separately. The words of Scott and Denney are : r* No arbi-
trary rules can be given as to the proper length of paragraphs.
Observing the custom of some of our best writers, we may safely
say that it is not well to extend a single paragraph beyond three
hundred words. The advantage of at least one paragraph inden-
tation on almost every page of a printed book is felt by every
reader. On the other hand, as Professor Earle says {English
Prose, p. 212), *The term paragraph can hardly be applied to
anything short of three sentences,' though rarely a complete and
satisfactory effect is produced, by two/^
Here, then, the question is transferred from writers whose dis-
cussion has chiefly a pedagogical purpose to one whose point of
view is chiefly historical. It is in speaking of present-day writers
that Earle says there must be at least two sentences to the para-
graph in order to secure "a complete and satisfactory effect."
These last words of Professor Earle are vague. What is "a com-
plete and satisfactory effect," in the paragraph? Is it an effect of
logical division or partition? or is it, for instance, a rhythmical
effect ? In either case, or both, it is not hard to show that good
authors of this century do not infrequently get the desired effect
by the use of the paragraph of one sentence.
^ Foundations ^ p. 325. "^Paragraph Writing, p. 10.
24 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
To be sure, the single-sentence paragraph is less used in this
century than in the last, and much less today than in the day of
the good bishop quoted by Angus and by D. J. Hill. It may be
worth while to indicate rather more specifically just what the
general course of this development has been, and how the usage
now stands. The following lists will show a count of the per-
centage of single-sentence paragraphs in various authors, the
second column of figures indicating the whole number of para-
graphs considered. In cases where the greater part of the
indented sentences are due to dialogue, an asterisk is prefixed.
In the other authors there is either no dialogue or not enough
thus paragraphed to raise the percentage materially. In a third
column is added, for purposes of comparison, the average sentence-
length of each author, based on the paragraphs indicated in the
second column.
Per cent, of Parafyranhs Average number
Author. single -sentence „fI!TirLj of words in the
paragraphs. considered. sentence.
Defoe : Essay on Projects, - 62 200 49'64
♦ Bunyan, . . . 61 200 31.61
Paley, - - - 58 200 37.68
Sterne, . . . 55 200 36.50
Spenser, - - - - 48 200 49.80
♦Scott, ... 45 551 32.53
♦ Dickens, - - - - 43 300 23.78
Stow, - - - c. 41 200 c. 57.00
♦ Kingsley, - - 39 200 23.72
Fielding, - . . 38 — 200:100 — 41.92
Lord Brooke, - - 35 200 c. 55.00
Hobbes, . . - 35 200 39-26
*Landor, - - 34 200 26.18
Lyly,- - - . 33 221 36.83
Bacon: Advancement, - - 32 no 60.03
♦George Eliot, 27 212 22.39
Johnson, - - - - 27 152 38.15
Lord Herbert, - - 25 40 75-00
Walton: Life of Hooker, - 25 106 64.00
Fuller, - - - 20 100 23.45
Burton, - - - 18 100 40.14
Burke, - - - 18 145 26.09
RHETORICAL THEORIES OF THE PARAGRAPH,
25
Author.
Locke,
Latimer,
Cranmer,
* Irving,
Clarendon,
Lamb,
Swift, -
De Quincey, -
Temple, -
Webbe,
Addison, -
Ruskin,
Browne, -
Gosson,
Dryden, -
Reginald Pecock,
Ascham, -
Sidney,
Milton, -
Coleridge,
Tyndale, -
Goldsmith,
Pater,
Jeremy Taylor,
Newman,
Bolingbroke,
Barrett Wendell,
Matthew Arnold,
Cowley, -
Herbert Spencer,
Lowell, -
Emerson,
Jeffrey, -
Macaulay,
Hume,
Gibbon,
Channing,
Dr. Bartol, -
Abraham Lincoln,
J. R. Green, -
^ Per cent, of
single -sentence
paragraphs.
Paragraphs
considered.
Average number
of words in the
sentence.
18
200
49.80
18
116
20.45
17
100
37.22
17
129
26.73
15
— 200 : 100-
74.94
15
87
27.19
15
200
40.00
14
89
38.81
14
184
53.40
14
75
50.50
14
200
38.36
13
151
33.31
13
107
33.09
II
45
60.
II
180
38.04
C. ID
200
c. 61.
ID
100
43.13
10
79
38.10
10
•33
50.70
8
100
37.60
8
100
31.72
8
107
26.94
7
37
38.40
6
109
52.93
6
200
41.40
5
173
34.86
5
55
25.65
5
71
34.41
5
66
25.65
4
68
30.38
4
75
31.47
3
122
20.58
3
100
50.65
2
3338
23.43
I
200
39.81
200
31.21
—
60
25.35
—
45
16.63
—
12
16.25
200
29.09
4
26 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
The fact that these names are arranged in the order of the
frequency with which the paragraph of one sentence occurs is not
meant to imply that a consideration of larger numbers of para
graphs might not change the order. When not more than thirty
or forty paragraphs are considered the only conclusion that can
be drawn is whether the author is or is not afraid of indenting
single sentences. It will, however, appear from the list that the
general course of our prose development has been away from the
paragraph of one sentence ; but that the most polished stylists of
the last twenty-five years have returned to a certain freedom in
its use. The reason for the decrease in the use of the single-
sentence paragraph is to be found in the historical shortening of
the sentence ; and the whole question will be considered in the
next chapter.
Meanwhile it is enough if we can interpret the fact
that this form of the paragraph has been used by represent-
ative prosaists of every period in English literature. The
figures given point to the conclusion that the real test of what is
a paragraph has always been analysis — either a logical or a
rhetorical analysis of the parts of the whole composition. The
final question with nearly every great writer has not been, Is
this paragraph a group of sentences? but. Is this paragraph a
real stadium in the thought?
This is not saying that the stadium must always be a logical
step. The analysis may be purely rhetorical, the thought being
raised to the dignity of a paragraph by its artistic value in the
general development. Matter merely transitional from one main
thought to another may thus form a paragraph, because it is, as
ih the old* sense of the word, something important to be noticed.
So frequent, indeed, in nineteenth century prose are the
transitional, preliminary, and directive single-sentence para-
graphs that some critic might question whether they do not
constitute by far the major part of the indented sentences. A
reading of Macaulay's single-sentence paragraphs — of which
there are 64 in the whole History, if we include in the text the part
RHETORICAL THEORIES OF THE PARAGRAPH. 27
published after the author's death — will convince anyone that
very important logical stadia are often paragraphed in the
indented sentence.
Returning to Professor Earle, we find it worth noticing that
Earle's favorite author, Dr. Johnson, uses no less than 27 per
cent, of single-sentence paragraphs. Nay more, in the very
book in which Earle makes the dictum we have quoted, there are
various excellent paragraphs of less than two sentences each.
Not every author writes better in style than on style : Professor
Earle is one who enjoys that distinction.
§2.
jjt is evident that there may be as many types of paragraph as
there are ways of developing an idea.^ Exhaustively to enumer-
ate these types would be useless and would require an arbitrary
method. J^Th^re are, however, certain chief types that may serve
as a means of distinguishing one author from another with
reference to general methods of developing a topic^
Genung was the first writer to assign definite names to para-
graph types. He distinguishes first the Propositional Paragraph,
of which he says : " This is the common and natural type ; indeed,
the other kinds of paragraphs may perhaps be regarded merely
as sections of an ideal structure represented by this form."' He
proceeds to explain that in this type "the subject is expressed in
the form of a definite assertion, and then developed, by proof or
illustration or some form of repetition." It is indeed true, as
Genung says, that this is the common type ; the great majority
of English paragraphs are to some extent propositional. Whether
it is the ideal type is a question at least open to discussion. It is
certain that some of the best writing is such because it subtly
avoids the massing of its main idea in a formal first sentence.
Topic songs are not, for being such, necessarily better than other
songs. Genung next names the Amplifying Paragraph, "whose
office it is to particularize or amplify some statement made
previously, or to enumerate the details of a description or
^ Practical Elements ^ p. 210.
28 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
narrative." The name seems happy for the office described in
the first clause of the definition, but is hardly descriptive of that
implied in the second clause. Genung speaks also of the Pre-
liminary Paragraph, "that gives merely the general theme of a
chapter, essay, or section ; or lays out the plan of a succeeding
course of thought" — and of the Transitional Paragraph.
The fullest classification of types is that of Scott and Denney.'
^These gentlemen treat first the Isolated Paragraph. Under this
they separate first the type that is expository and argumentative,
secondly that which is descriptive and narrative. These two
general types are again subdivided. The first breaks into the
logical type and the less formal types ; the logical again shows two
species, — the deductive and the inductive, — while the less formal
types include paragraphs of definition, paragraphs of detail, etc.
The authors then proceed to the Related Paragraph, which of
course shows the same structural characteristics as the Isolated,
and also a few special forms — introductory and concluding, tran-
sitional and directive, and amplifying.
For the purposes of this discussion I shall feel at liberty to
make use of any or all of the names that have been introduced
by the authors referred to in the last two paragraphs. I shall
also think of paragraphs as Loose or Periodic, and would like to
suggest these terras as quite as applicable to the paragraph as to
~ the sentence. The Loose will state the subject first. When the
main conclusion is also stated first and applied in the following
sentences the Loose paragraph will be Deductive : often the
proposition of a deductive paragraph will form a general rule,
broader than the immediate particulars will justify. The Peri-
odic will suspend the full enunciation of the subject through
most of the sentences. When the main conclusion of the Periodic
is suspended to the last and made to follow from the particulars
of the paragraph, the Periodic type will also be Inductive.
It will further be useful to distinguish the Compound Para-
graph, where the unity of the whole depends on the union of^
^ Paragraph Writing^ p. 47 ff.
RHETORICAL THEORIES OF THE PARAGRAPH, 29
several smaller sections. Such paragraphs, the parts separated
by figures or letters, are plentiful among the analytic writers —
De Quincey, Newman, for instance. The early editions of Herbert
Spencer's books indicate the compound nature of a paragraph by
a wider space between the first sentence of one subsection, and
the last of the preceding. There is also such a thing as a Spaced
Paragraph, the opposite of the compound ; here, in the midst of
related paragraphs, one, seeming more important or less related
than the others, is widely separated from them by leads. When
a group of paragraphs is separated, by spacing, from another
group, and is perhaps distinguished by a large initial, we may
find it convenient to refer to such a group as a Compound Capi-
tal Paragraph, in distinction from a section. In Anglo-Saxon
will be found many Simple Capital Paragraphs — ordinary para-
graphs introduced by capitals.
§3-
Most of the theorizing that has been done concerning the
paragraph as an organic unit follows the line of the " six rules **
of Bain.' These are as follows Jl. " The bearing of each sentence
upon what precedes shall be explicit and unmistakable." II.
"When several consecutive sentences iterate or illustrate the same
idea, they should, so far as possible, be formed alike. This may
be called the rule of Parallel Construction." III. C^he opening
sentence, unless so constructed as to be obviously preparatory, is
expected to indicate with prominence the subject of the para-
graph.^j^ IV. "A paragraph should be consecutive, or free from
dislocation." V. " A paragraph should possess unity ; which
implies a definite purpose, and forbids digressions and irrelevant
matter." VI. "As in the sentence, so in the paragraph, a due
proportion should obtain between principal and subordinate
statements/^ These six rules were illustrated and defended with
the same acuteness and grasp that have made Bain perhaps the
ablest writer on rhetoric since Aristotle. It is evident that the
third rule is one of the historical causes of the widely diffused
' English Composition and Rhetoric^ § i58-§ 179.
30 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
impression that the loose paragraph is the only right kind. Bain
gave no examples of the periodic structure, though it is hard to
see how he could have missed knowing plenty of good examples
of it — especially in a day when everyone was reading Macaulay.
Bain's six rules have indeed had a very strong influence in lead-
ing the teachers of paragraph principles to advocate a purely
logical structure, and particularly an. expository structure. They
have re-appeared with new names and various modifications in the
best text-books of the last quarter-century. They constitute the
formal criterion by which Minto judges paragraph values. They
are quoted by McElroy and regulate his discussion. They
appear in Genung with slight variations. Barrett Wendell evi-
dently combines the first, second, and fourth, to get his rule of
Coherence. The third and sixth he includes in his theory of
Mass, with the important addition of his own idea that the close
of a paragraph is a more prominent position than the beginning.
Scott and Denney follow Bain with one or two variations. For
instance, McElroy had emphasized the principle of selection
with reference to the arrangement of the parts of a composition ;
this principle is introduced by Scott and Denney as a paragraph
principle. It amounts to what might be called Unity by Exclu-
sion — exclusion of such details as do not contribute to the artistic
effect sought. The same authors make prominent the principle
of variety, which had been mentioned with some disparagement
by Bain, but more fully treated by McElroy — variety in length
of sentences, in their structure, in the ordering of details, in the
method of building different paragraphs, and in the length of
different paragraphs.
The only really new phases of paragraph theory since Bain —
and the germs of both are in Bain — are Wendell's theory of
Mass, and Scott and Denney's theory of Proportion.
Wendell, proceeding on his theory that the paragraph is to
the sentence what the sentence is to the word, writes as
follows: "We have already seen that a paragraph should possess
unity ; we have already seen that the test of unity in a paragraph
RHEIVRICAL THEORIES OF THE PARAGRAPH. 31
is whether we can sum up its substance in a single sentence.
Now, clearly the chief words in a typical sentence are the subject
and the predicate. Clearly, then, in general, the chief ideas in a
paragraph are those which are summarized in the subject and the
predicate of the sentence which summarizes the whole. Our
question, then, proves one which, by implication, we have already
answered. A paragraph whose unity can be demonstrated by
summarizing its substance in a sentence whose subject shall be a
summary of its opening sentence, and whose predicate shall be a
summary of its closing sentence, is theoretically well massed." '
This is both clever and interesting; and as a matter of theory it
is probably more than half true and good. Historically, however, \y/
paragraphs as well massed as this are comparatively few : Mr.
Wendell gives some good illustrations from editorials in the
Nation, and others could be found. But it may be important for
the details of a paragraph to be kept as nearly as possible coordi-
nate in prominence. Some descriptive paragraphs, some narra-
tive paragraphs, are not to be arranged in climax of any sort.
The law of Mass, however, must admit other means of promi-
nence than placing main ideas where the eye will easily catch
them. The relative distance between periods in a paragraph is
one of these means, and the actual bulk of writing — the whole
number of sentences to an idea — is another. Bain, in his section
on the sentence, had said : "In description, and in narrative, it
is often requisite to bring together in the same sentence several
distinct facts. A sentence is then a smaller paragraph." He
proceeds: "The only rule that can be observed in distinguish-
ing the sentences^ to choose the longer breaks in the sense."'
This is probably the hint that led to the writing of the most
important section in Scott and Denney's recent book.^ " The
grammars and rhetorics, which regard the sentence as the unit of ''.
discourse, give rules for punctuation applying mainly to the
^English Composition f p. 128 ff.
'§157.
3 Paragraph Writing, p. 42.
32 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
proper pointing of the various parts of the sentence. Consider-
ing the paragraph, however, as the true unit of discourse, we are
met by questions of punctuation which the rules usually given do
not answer. The rule tells us to put a period at the close of
every declarative sentence ; but the important question, for the
paragraph writer, often is, what is the proper place at which to
bring the sentence to a close ? In the paragraph, not every dis-
tinct statement is followed by a full stop. Statements which
standing alone would properly be independent sentences, are
frequently united into one sentence when they become part of a
paragraph." The next paragraph follows Bain*s words. "The
rule dictated by paragraph unity for the division of a paragraph
into sentences is that the full stops should be placed at the close
of the larger breaks in the thought. What the sentence divisions
shall be will depend upon the meaning in each case ; upon the
need of giving prominence to the chief assertion and of keepint^
the other assertions subordinate A general statement
containing the main idea may be followed by a specific state-
ment, with only a colon or semicolon separating the two. The
same rule is followed when the second statement gives a short
reason, an example, a qualification, a consequence, an explana-
tion, or a repetition." Many other cases are adduced where the
grouping of particulars in a sentence tends to increase their joint
unity and reduce their individual distinction.
The law thus formulated is so strongly operative in the best
prose of today that it seems to me safe to proceed even farther
and say : in general it is true that in the best modern paragraphs
the distance between periods is inversely as the emphasis of each
included proposition. Today the best prosaists put their
strongest statements into short sentences. This is not exactly
the same thing as saying that they use the short sentence to give
prominence. Prominence they may obtain by a mass of amplify-
ing sentences, which in turn reflects prominence on the short
general statement that usually accompanies them. Again, prom-
inence may be obtained by massing for the eye ; but it will often
RHETORICAL THEORIES OF THE PARAGRAPH, 33
happen that to mass at the beginning oi;at the end the chief idea,
may seriously limit the method of development.
One other point in rhetorical theory may be mentioned.
The question was raised as far back as Campbell, whether or not
a sentence may properly begin with a conjunction. This ques-
tion, which, it would seem, has but one side, has been settled at
last, and no one now doubts the propriety of beginning a sentence
with and or but if the new idea is really coordinate with what
precedes. Any conjunction — if we are to accept the best litera-
ture as evidence — may begin a sentence, though certain con-
nectives prefer an interior position. In recent years McElroy,
managing to make up a most vivacious case against a rather
equivocal statement of A. S. Hill, proved beyond cavil that a
conjunction may begin a paragraph. Hill had said:' "A
paragraph indicates that there is a break in the sense too important
to be bridged by a conjunction." McElroy enthusiastically
proved that no end of good paragraphs could be cited to the
contrary. Of course the point of the matter is, that if a para-
graph so begins, it is to be taken as standing, in its entirety, in
a certain relation to the preceding paragraph as a whole. We
shall later have occasion to trace something of the course of inter-
sentential connectives.
^ Principle s^ p. 1 1 6.
CHAPTER III.
PARAGRAPH-LENGTH AND SENTEN'CE-LENGTH.
In view of the now well-known fact' that the English sen-
tence has decreased in average length at least one-half in three
hundred years, the question arises whether the length of the
paragraph has decreased, increased, or remained stationary. Set-
ting aside for the present the O. E. and the M. E. paragraph as
inorganic, we make a count of the average number of words to the
sentence and to the paragraph, in representative authors since the
middle of the fifteenth century. Considerations of time compel
us to choose between counting a large number of paragraphs in
a few writers, or a smaller number in a considerable list. Since
we are not sanguine at the start that a unit so subject to the will
of the writer as the paragraph apparently is, can be expected to
show close rhythmical constancy, we decide to examine the larger
list, with less pretense to scientific accuracy in the individual
author, and with more hope of discovering the whole general line
of the development. We arrange the results of the investigation in
list form, as below. The name of the author is first given, then
the number of paragraphs counted (c. being prefixed to the sub-
sequent results in the few cases where the count is not throughout
word for word); following this comes the average length of the
paragraph in words, decreasing from the author of the highest
average ; then the average paragraph length in sentences ; then the
average number of words in the sentence. Pains were taken to
secure editions in which the paragraphing was probably that of
the author's edition. In many cases first editions were fortu-
nately secured, and when neither first edition, very early edition,
nor facsimile could be had, the services of friends at a distance
' The fact was definitely demonstrated by Professor L. A. Sherman, in his
Analytics of Literature, Boston, 1892.
34
PARAGRAPH-LENGTH AND SENTENCE-LENGTH, 35
were made use of,— friends who could examine and verify the para-
graphing of the editions in question. It may be guessed that the
hands of later editors have often so changed the original para-
graphing as to make the process of hunting down the original
anything but exhilarating. A list of the editions used is given in
the Bibliography, p. lygff. In the table of paragraph lengths an
asterisk is placed before names where the paragraph is materially
shortened by dialogue.
Author and Wo.k. ^»^^^_ "^^^l
Hooker: Ecclesiastical Polity ^ - - i6-Bk.I.i86&.43
Sentences
per parag.
45.31
Words per
sentence.
41.23
Lowell : Dante, ....
50
668.30
Milton : Areopagitica, - - - -
33
543.88
10.73
50.70
Jeremy Taylor : Liberty of Prophesying,
109
502.63
9.49
52.93
J. R. Green : Hist, of the English People,
200
c. 456.75
15.74
c. 29.04
Lowell: Carlyle,
25
447.84
14.24
31.45
Burton : Anatomy of Melancholy,
100
380.57
9.48
40.14
De Quincey : Opium Eater, -
89
355.42
9.16
38.81
Channing: Self -Culture,
60
316.81
12.50
25.35
Dr. Bartol : Genitts, . . . .
45
297.44
17.89
16.63
Arnold : Lit. Infl. of Acad.-\-Func. of Crit,
71
293.26
8.52
34.41
Coleridge: The Friend,
100
292.41
7.77
37.60
Macaulay : History of England,
3338
291.96
12.44
23.43
Gosson: School of Abuse ,
45
c. 288.00
C.4.I4
c. 60.00
Dryden : Prefaces, - . - -
180
277.55
7.22
38.44
Jeffrey : Contribs. to Edinburgh Review,
100
276.08
5.45
50.65
Cowley : Essays, ... - -
66
268.27
7.38
48.37
Pecock : Repressour, &^c., - - -
200
c. 262.00
4.29
c. 61.00
Newman : Idea of a University,
200
254.48
6.14
41.44
Carlyle : Richter, - . - .
34
250.62
7.94
31.56
Lord Herbert : Autobiography,
40
249.00
3.30
75.60
Gibbon : Rome, ....
200
243.74
7.81
31.21
Hume : England, ...
200
238.87
6.00
39.81
Sidney: Defense of Poesie,
79
235.30
6.50
38.80
Swift : Gulliver, .....
200
234.22
5.85
40.00
Pater : Style,
37
228.37
5.92
38.54
Goldsmith : Vicar of Wakefield,
107
218.59
8.11
26.94
Clarendon : History of the Rebellion, -
100
217.32
2.90
74.94
Lyly: Euphues, .....
221
211.03
5.73
36.83
Macaulay : Essays, ....
325
206.67
8.96
23.05
Bacon: Advancement of Learning,
no
204.67
3.41
60.03
Tyndale : Obedience of a Christian Man,
no
204.48
6.45
31.72
HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Holinshed : ChranicU,
Locke Conduiloflht Understanding,
. Emersnn : Essays and Addresses,
BolingUroke : Ltller to Wyndkam,
Herbert Spencer Phitasophy of Style,
Walton Lifto/HooktT.
Stow r Chronicle, . - - -
Swiil : Tale of a T«i, -
Ruskin: Sesame and Lilies,
Addison ; Freeholder, -
Barrett Wendell ! Tie Paragraph, •
Carlylei Sarlor Resarlus,
Lamb: Essays of Elia,
Burke : CoHcUialion with America,
Carlyle ; French Revolution,
Temple : Heroic Virtue, -
Webbe ; Defense of English Poesie,
Lord Brooke Lift ef Sidney. -
Deloe Robinson Crusoe,
Abraham Lincoln: Letter,
Cranmer: Answer to Gardiner,
Aacham : Toxopkilus,
Spenser: View of State of Ir
Browne: Hydriotaphia,
Latimer : Sermons,
Hobbes ; Leviathan,
— Tbos. Wilson : Art of Rhe
♦Irving : Sketch Book,
♦Fielding : Tom fanes, -
Johnson : Rasselai and Rambler,
■•Landor: Convfrsalians (Slalcsmrn),
Fuller: Worthies of England, -
Defoe ; Essay on Projects,
*Kingslev Alton Locke, -
*ScotI Jvanhot.
"George Eliot: Daniel Deronda,
Paley : Moral and Political Philosophy,
Selden : Table Talk,
•Sterne; Sentimental foumey,
•Bunyan : Pilgrim's Progress, -
•Dickens ; Old Curiosity Sliop,
dand.
:. 186.00
185.77
i7g.6o
173-25
170.23
'65-35
163.7.
160.31
156.30
I41.63 .
138.25
137-75
13S-85
76.77
■J&:S7
73-85
72.go
71.37
35,65
35.05
43-13
33-09
10.45
39.26
26.73
25-43
23-4S
49.64
23-74
32.14
22.39
37.68
33.58
36.50
PARAGRAPH-LENGTH AND SENTENCE-LENGTH, 37
It is pretty clear from these figures that for relatively the same
kinds of discourse there has been no steady decrease in the average
word-length of the paragraph. Indeed, if we rule out Hooker's
enormous sections as properly no paragraphs at all, we find a crit-
ical essay of Lowell at the head of the column with a paragraph of
668 words, while the little book that stands as in some sense the
parent of English criticism, Sir Thomas Wilson's Art of Rhetor-
ique, we find pretty near the end of the line, with a paragraph of
115 words. Green's English People, 456 words, may be contrasted
with Fuller's Worthies, 86 words. Dr. Bartol's jerky homiletic
sentence is not a third as long as Jeremy Taylor's golden period,
but Bartol's paragraph is two-thirds as long as Taylor's. Pecock
and Newman differ in paragraphs only seven words, though in
sentences, twenty. Carlyle's paragraph (in Richter) is not a
whole word longer than Lord Herbert's, though Carlyle's sen-
tence is much less than half Lord Herbert's. Locke and Emer-
son, though twenty-nine words apart in sentence average, have
practically the same paragraph. Lincoln's paragraph is wichin a
word the same as Cranmer's, but Lincoln's sentence is 18, Cran-
mer's, 37. Evidently, then, the great changes in the structure of
our prose have taken place within the paragraph, and have not, in
four hundred years, materially affected the length of the para-
graph. Probably no reputable English writer who wrote para-
graphs at all has risen above an average of sev en hun dr ed worj j ^s.
nor has any fallen below fifty — the great difference being due
chiefly to the different genres of prose ; and these extremes
have probably been reached in each generation of English
prosaists.
We shall hardly see the full meaning of the fact that the
word length of the paragraph has not decreased with the decrease
in sentence length, until we note more definitely the apparent
increase in the number of sentences to the paragraph. It may
be worth while to re-arrange the list of authors to exhibit the
course of the progress. This time we may proceed from the
N ^/
38
HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
lowest number of sentences (per paragraph) to the highest. As
before, we star names where the results are much affected by
dialogue. We add two or three new names.
Defoe : Essay on Projects^
Defoe : Robinson Crusoe^
Bunyan,
♦Sterne, ....
Paley,
♦Dickens, - - - -
Selden,
♦Scott, - ...
♦Fielding,
Spenser, - - - -
Johnson,
Lord Brooke,
Clarendon, -
Temple, - - - -
Walton,
Hobbes, - - - -
Webbe,
Ascham, - - - -
Stow,
Lord Herbert,
♦Kingsley,
Bacon, - - - x -
♦George Eliot,
♦ Landor, - - - -
Fuller,
Cranmer, ...
Browne, . - .
Locke, . - - -
♦Irving,
Gosson, - - - -
Pecock,
Addison, . - - -
Carlyle : Sartor Resartus,
Ruskin, - - - -
Jeffrey,
* The numerical accounts are omitted.
Average
Average
entences per
paragrapn.
words in
sentence,
I.71
49.64
1.80
78.68
1.98
31.61
1.95
36.50
1.96
37.68
2.13
23.78
2.17
33.58
2.22
32.14
2.43
41.92
2.51
49.80
2.58
38.15
2.70
c. 55.00
2.90
74.94
2.90
53.40
2.90
64.00
2.96
39.26
3.10
c. 50.50
3.15
43.13
3.30
c. 57.00
3.30
75.60
3.34
23.72
3.41
60.03
3.42
22.39
3.48
25.43
3.70
23.45
3.70
37.22
3.78
33.09
4.07
49.80
4.12
26.73
4.14
c. 60.00
4.29
c. 61.00
4.49
38.58
4.76
35.06
5.39
33.31
5-45
50.65
PARAGRAPH-LENGTH AND SENTENCE-LENGTH, 39
Average Average
sentences per words in
paragraph. sentence.
Bolingbroke, - - - - 5.67 34-86
Lyly, 5.73 36.83
Latimer, ----- 5.74 20.45
Swift, . - - . - 5.85 40.00
Pater, . - - - - 5.92 38.54
Blair, . . - - . 5.93
Hume, - - - - . 6.00 39-8i
Wordsworth, ----- 6.03
Lamb, ----- 6.08 27.19
Newman, - - - - 6.14 4i»44
Burke, ----- 6.20 26.09
Bentley, . . - . - 6.23
Herbert Spencer, - - - 6.35 30-38
Tyndale, ----- 6.45 31-72
Sidney, ----- 6.56 38.80
Barrett Wendell, - . . - 6.63 25.65
Carlyle: French Revolution, - - 6.71 23.89
Dryden, . - . . . 7.22 38-44
Cowley, ----- 7.38 48.37
Lincoln, - - . - - 7.60 18.23
Coleridge, - . . . 7.77 37.60
Gibbon, ----- 7.81 31.21
Carlyle: Richter, - - - 7.94 31.56
Goldsmith, - - - - - 8. 11 26.94
Arnold, ----- 8.52 34.41
Macaulay: Essays, - - - - 8.96 23.05
De Quincey, - - - - 9.16 38.81
Burton, ----- 9.48 40.14
Taylor, ----- 9.49 52.93
Emerson, ----- 9.66 20.58
Milton, ----- 10.73 50.70
Macaulay: England, . . . 12.44 23.43
Channing, - - - - ' 12.50 25.35
Lowell, ----- 14.24 31.45
J. R. Green, - - - - 15-74 c. 29.04
Bartol, ----- 17.89 16.63
Evidently, from these figures, the number of sentences in the
paragraph has in general increased, while the sentence length has
decreased. There have, however, been noticeable exceptions to
\
40
HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
the rule. Both rule and
arrange the list so as to
sentence length.
Defoe : Crusoe^
Lord Herbert,
Clarendon, -
Walton, -
Pecock,
Gosson, -
Bacon : Advancement^
Stow,
Brooke,
Temple, -
Taylor,
Jeffrey, -
Milton,
Webbe, -
Spenser,
Locke,
Defoe : Projects^
Cowley, -
Ascham,
♦Fielding, -
Newman,
Hooker, -
Burton,
Swift, -
Hume,
Hobbes, -
De Quincey, -
Addison, -
Pater,
Dryden, -
Johnson,
Sidney,: Defense^
Paley,
Coleridge,
Cranmer,
Lyly, -
Sterne,
exceptions will be made clearer if we
exhibit prominently the decrease in
Average
words in
sentence.
Average
sentence per
paragraph.
78.68
1.80
75.60
3.30
74.94
2.90
64.00
2.90
c. 61.00
4.29
c. 60.00
c. 4.14
60.03
3.61
c. 57.00
c. 3.30
c. 55.00
c. 2.70
53.40
2.90
52.93
9.49
50.65
5.45
50.70
10.73
c. 50.5
c. 3.1
49.80
2.51
49.80
4.07
49.64
I.7I
48.37
3.93
43.13
3-15
41.92
2.43
41.44
6.14
41.23
45.31 (§i
40.14
9.48
40.00
5.85
39.81
6.00
39.26
2.96
38.81.
9.16
38.58
4.49
38.54
5-92
38.44
7.22
38.15
2.58
38.10
6.50
37.68
1.96
37.60
7.77
37.22
3.70
36.83
5.73
36.5
1.95
PARAGRAPH-LENGTH AND SENTENCE-LENGTH.
41
Carlyle : Sartor^ ....
Bolingbroke, - - - -
Arnold, ... - -
Selden, ....
Ruskin, ... - -
Browne, - . .
Scott, . - . . .
Tyndale, . . . .
Bunyan, -----
Carlyle : Richter,
Lowell, -----
Gibbon, ....
Herbert Spencer,
J. R. Green, - - - -
Bacon : Essays y - - - -
Lamb,- _ - . .
Goldsmith, ....
♦Irving, - - - -
Burke, . . . - .
Barrett Wendell,
♦Landor, . - - - -
Channing, . - . .
Carlyle : French Revolution^
* Dickens, ....
♦Kingsley, ....
Fuller, ....
Macaulay, ....
♦George Eliot,
Emerson, ....
Latimer, ....
Lincoln, -----
Bartol, ....
The rule that decrease in average sentence-length is accom-
panied by increase in the average number of sentences to the para-
graph, is evidently not to be stated in the form of strict propor-
tion. The fluctuations are considerable, even when we omit all
the authors in whom dialogue plays a great part. The most
noticeable exceptions to the general principle are Taylor and
Average
words in
sentence.
Average
sentence per
paragraph.
35.06
4-76
34.86
5.67
34.41
8.52
33-58
2.17
33.31
5.39
33.09
3.78
32.14
2.22
31.72
6.45
31.61
1.98
31-56
7.94
31-45
14.24
31.21
7.81
30.38
6.35
c. 29.04
15.74
28.
27.19
6.c8
26.94
8.11
26.73
4.12
26.09
6.31
25.65
6.63
25-43
3.48
25.35
12.50
23.89
6.71
23.78
2.13
23.72
3.34
23-45
3.70
23.43
12.44
22.39
3.42
20.58
9.66
20.45
5.74
18.23
7.60
16.63
17.89
\
42 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Milton, whose paragraph and whose sentence are both very long.
Milton had no paragraph sense except of the paragraph as a
device for occasional emphasis. At least so it seems to me ;
though the friends of Milton's prose would probably hold that
these great paragraphs represent immense thought units ; that
Milton's prose moves — as Wordsworth pointed out that his blank-
verse strophes move — in vast circles. Taylor, whether in para-
graph or sentence, was forever conceiving a unit larger (by its
profusion of accessory thought) than could be logically arranged
within itself. Another noticeable exception is Paley, whose
sentence (37.68) is about as long as Coleridge^s, but whose para-
graph (73.85) is shorter than George Eliot's. Paley is perhaps
the most deliberate — not the most discriminating — analyzer by
paragraphs, in the history of English prose. He sets by itself
everything that can possibly claim to mark a step of the whole
composition. Dr. Johnson, too, has a surprisingly short para-
graph (98.40); and its brevity is not due to dialogue. De Quincey
has too long a sentence for a style that numbers the same para-
graph length in sentences as Emerson's. Sidney, Burton, Dryden,
Latimer, Gosson, Pecock, Tyndale, all come later in the list than
one might expect, but Latimer and Tyndale are quite as late
proportionally in sentence-length. The fact is that Tyndale and
Latimer belong to the Anglo-Saxon tradition that would have
developed the modern paragraph two hundred years earlier, but
for Latin influences in the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth
centuries.
But we may safely conclude that the paragraph of today con-
tains at least twice as many sentences as did that of Ascham's
day. Indeed if we accept Macaulay's England as a present-day
norm, the past increase in the number of sentences per paragraph
will be far more than one hundred per cent, in three hundred
years.
§3-
It is easy now to interpret that decrease, in the use of the
single-sentence paragraph, which we noted in the preceding
PARAGRAPH LENGTH AND SENTENCE LENGTH 43
chapter ; likewise the relatively stationary word-length of the
paragraph ; likewise the decrease in sentence-length and the
increase of the number of sentences to the group.
Evidently there has been from the earliest days of our prose
a unit of invention much larger than the modern sentence, and
always separated in the mind of the writer from the sentence
unit, of whatever length. In other words, men have thought
roughly in long stages before they have thought accurately in
short ones. The process of composition is always relatively an
intuitive one ; the process of writing is relatively an analytic one.
tihe writer conceives his paragraph topic before he develops it,
,v though of course in the process of development the associations
of the symbols used may lead him afield. He thinks, so to speak,
in successive nebulous masses, perceiving in each a luminous
centre before he analyzes the whole. The size of these nebulous
masses, or, to change the figure, the size and the complexity of
the mental picture, is conditioned by the mental power of the
thinker. One man thinks in longer paragraphs than another,
though of course he may deliberately analyze his larger para-
graph-units into smaller ones, for the benefit of his less nimble
readerTj
Whether, now, this large unit of thought — always represented
by the paragraph device — shall be broken into short propositions
or not, is another question. In any case the mental unit is the
same : the unit of the excessively long period is the unit of the
paragraph. In Tyndale and Latimer the tendency is to analyze
into short sentences, with a view to assisting ready comprehen-
sion. In Spenser and Defoe and Lord Brooke, the impulse is to
construct a single long sentence, partly in the vague hope of indi-
cating more closely the relative value of propositions, and partly
out of sheer garrulity. Again, though it is not the most latinized
writers who use most freely paragraphs of one sentence, yet the
long period brought in by the early classical influence is of course
a prime force in restraining the tendency to resolve the para-
graph into short sentences.
44 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
The paragraph as we know it comes into something like
settled shape in Sir William Temple. It was the resultant of per-
haps five chief influences. First, the tradition that the paragraph
mark or the indentation distinguishes a stadium in thought ; this
tradition is fairly strong in fifteenth and sixteenth century writers,
barring the few most completely under Latin influence. Second,
the Latin influence, which was rather towards disregarding para-
graph mark or indentation as a sign of anything but emphasis :
the typical writer is Hooker. • Third, the natural genius of the
Anglo-Saxon structure. Fourth, the beginnings of popular
writing — what maybe called the beginning of oral style, or con-
sideration for a relatively uncultivated audience. Fifth, the study
of French prose, in this respect a late influence, allied in its results
to the third and fourth influences.
Of these influences the second was the common enemy of all
the rest. It tended, however, to ally itself with the first as soon
as it found its own power unequal to the task of making Latin-
English prose intelligible, and for a time we have the single-
sentence paragraph of great length. The Latinists still think
themselves bound to group many clauses in one sentence, but
they feel the natural genius of the language conflicting with
their wish. They cannot discard their large unit of thought —
that would be, to them, philosophic retrogression. They cannot
— in the uninflected language — go on indefinitely prolonging
the period. They determine to make long sentences still, and,
when the periodic structure fails, to secure distinction and intel-
ligibility for the long unit by paragraphing it. Hence arises the
interminable paragraphed sentence, not strictly periodic, by any
means, but articulated by all the points of the periodos — (: ; , .)
Even men as early as Ascham and Bacon are full of such amor-
phous things. I suppose Bacon ^ felt that he had a rather
* I am aware that there is ground for laying the blame of some of this punc-
tuation upon the printer. The fact does not alter our point of view materially.
The writers themselves used commas oftener than they did colons and periods,
where colons and periods ought to have been. And though the printer has
PARAGRAPH-LENGTH AND SENTENCE-LENGTH, 45
pretty unit in such paragraphs as appear on p. 69 or p. 64, of the
first edition of the Advancement. The one on p. 69 is devoted
exclusively to Antoninus Pius. Something very symmetrical and
satisfactory in disposing of Antoninus Pius in a single sentence
and a single paragraph !
Antoninus Pius, who fucceeded him, was a Prince excellently
learned; and had the patient and fubtile Wit of a Schoole-man : Info-
much as in common f pee ch, {which leaves no virtue vntaxed) hee was
called Cymini Sector, a Caruer, or diuider of Comine feede, which is
one of the leaf t f cedes: fuch a patience hee had and fetled fpirit, to
enter into the leaft 6^ most exact differences of caufes : a fruite no
doubt of the exceeding tranquillity , and ferenity of his minde: which
being no wayes charged or incumbred, eyther with feares, remorfes,
or fcruples, but hauing beene noted for a man of the pur eft goodneffe,
without all fiction, or affectation, that hath raigned or lived: made
his minde continually prefect and entyre : he likewife approached a
degree neerer vnto Chriftianity , and became as Agrippa faid vnto St.
Paul, Halfe a Chriftian; holding their Religion and Law in good
opinion ; and not only ceafing perfecution, but giuing way ta the
aduancement of Chriftians.
Lord Brooke and Spenser are perhaps the two greatest
offenders in this matter of the confusion of the period and the
paragraph.
At last the Latinists came to see that their units of thought
were too large to be developed in any one sentence of an unin-
flected language. The later Latinists were hurried on to this
conclusion by the excesses of certain of their own number.
They found it impossible to read some of Clarendon's clause-heaps,
always been something of a tyrant, it is folly to imply that our old authors, so
scrupulous about most things, could not have controlled the punctuation of their
printed books. The authors of the sixteenth century did make paragraphs in
their manuscripts, for the manuscripts that we have show them. If the printer
tampered with the paragraphing as he did with the punctuation, why then,
there is nothing for it but to hold the author responsible for not correcting
him.
46 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
nay, even some of Burton*s defied theni ; and doubtless more than
one classicist began to remember passages in their own beloved
Hooker that had once passed for profundity, but now began to
look like mere tangle. Mr. Saintsbury has applied to these
inextricable sentences of Clarendon and Burton the name of
"sentence-and-paragraph heap"' — a name hardly less awkward
than the thing itself. This is not to be confused, by the way,
with the single-sentence paragraph, which may or may not coin-
cide with it — does so in early prose often, in modern very
rarely. A better word for what Mr. Saintsbury means is
" clause-heap," a term that he employs in his preface to Bur-
ton in the recent second volume of Craik.^ In the " heap,"
"clause is linked on to clause till not merely the grammatical
but the philosophical integer is hopelessly lost sight of in a
tangle of jointings and appendages." As we said before, it is
not the writers of the most hopeless clause-heaps that write the
largest number of paragraphed sentences ; the " heap " belongs
chiefly to the Latinists. When, however, one of Clarendon's
heaps is paragraphed, the result is something disheartening.
The first single-sentence paragraph in the edition of 17 12 (p. 4)
has 242 words; the eighth (p. 28) has 166, and the thirteenth
(p. 45) has 195.
As authors like these, able men, though slow to put them-
selves in touch with the people, began to perceive the hopeless-
ness of their self-appointed task, they began to shorten the sen-
tence, retaining the paragraph. The wide popularity of the new
school of vernacular writers — if we may speak of Bunyan as
belonging to any school — inspired literary men with the new
desire to reach a larger public. Authors began to put them-
selves in the place of their readers, and write as if to an average
man. Soon the superiority of French prose began to be felt as
a vehicle for the expression of the clearer, more straightforward,
^ English Prose Style, in Specimens of English Prose^ p. xix. History of
Elizabethan Literature y p. 42, et al.
^Craik's English Prose, vol ii., p. 117.
PARAGRAPH-LENGTH AND SENTENCE-LENGTH. 47
less subtle phases of thought. From this time on, the develop-
ment of the modern paragraph is a matter of degree of skill
rather than of stylistic method.
Such, in the rough, is the history of the paragraph in the
most critical period of its history. The particulars of this
period will be given in Chapters VI. and VII.
§4.
One other general question may properly receive considera-
tion here : whether the length of the paragraph follows any
rhythmical law, as, for instance, one that renders the average
length a constant quantity, in successive large groups of para-
graphs. To illustrate, will two books written in the same genre
of composition, by the same author, yield anything like the
same paragraph averages ?
This question is rendered the more interesting by the recent
investigations of Professor Sherman and Mr. Gerwig, to the effect
that the sentence-length, the percentage of predications to the
period, and the percentage of simple sentences, each tends to be
constant in successive large groups of sentences, as of 500. In
his discussions of the constancy of the sentence-length, however.
Professor Sherman seems to give hardly weight enough to the
differences caused in an author's style by time. He mentions
several instances' where the sentence-length remains unchanged
by change of years ; and my own observations have furnished
others equally notable, none more so than that of Swift, who
varies not a whole word in twenty-eight years. But Sherman gives
no exceptions. Nay, he says, " Even Carlyle showed no change
for worse or better, in respect to sentence proportions, between
the Edinburgh Essays and his Frederick the Greats But it should
likewise be said that between the Essays and Frederick the average
sank (in the Revolution) fully one-third. In the formative period
of our prose similar changes are very common. Sidney's sen-
tence dropped in five years from 75 to 38.
* University Studies^ I., No. 4, p. 349.
48 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
We approach the general question of the constancy of the
paragraph, with an author as far back as Browne. We find
between the Hydrotaphia and the Religio a difference of seven
sentences to the paragraph, making the word- length of the
Religio nearly thrice that of the Hydrotaphia. No constancy
here. We try Taylor's Liberty of Prophesying ^ comparing the sec-
tions, beginning with the fourth. The word-averages run :
480.75,535.71, 788.33, 563.14, 648.66, 518.00, 450.00,681.75,
294-57, 418.92, 193.71. The paragraph- length by sentences runs:
8.37»7-46, 1416, 11.26, 10.83, 9-33» 9-i6, 1400, 5.71, 9.76, 4.78.
Since the sections vary from 10,000 words to 3,000, we feel that
the sentence averages are not so bad as we expected. Such
averages as 535, 563, 518, or 9.33, 9.16, 9.76, show at least
interesting coincidences. We hardly get anything more to the
purpose before Dryden. Cowley, for example, varies wildly in
his essays.
Dryden*s Satire yields 256 words, while two combined essays.
Translation and the Parallel between Poetry and Paintings yield
277 words. Defoe's Essay on Projects shows 1.90 sentences, and
Crusoe 1.87, which is delightfully close ; but the sentence so shoots
up in Crusoe as to make the word-length of the paragraph thrice
as great heie as in the Essay, Swift's sentence, as we have seen,
stays at 40, but Gulliver shows a paragraph of 234 words,
against 185 in the Tale of a Tub. Johnson helps us in the word-
length, showing 102 for the Rambler, 92 for Rasselas) but mean-
time the sentence has gone down a third. Hume is not unsatis
factory. The first 105 paragraphs of the History (26,197 words)
yield an average of 249 words; the next 95 paragraphs (21,578
words) yield an average of 226 words. We try the Vicar of Wake-
field by chapters, not expecting too much. The word results,
omitting fractions, run : 177, 183, 289, 161, 309, 302, 181, 298,
570, 236, 106, 215, 232, 344, 209, 182, the sentence average run-
ning, 27, 35, 28, 31, 26, 28, 25, 28, 25, 24, 25, 21, 22, 29, 26, 28.
If we average the averages of the first eight chapters against those
of the second eight, we shall have 237.96 words or 8.30 sentences
PARAGRAPH-LENGTH AND SENTENCE-LENGTH. 49
for the first eight, and 262.07 words, or 10.23 sentences for the
second eight.
Evidently Dryden and Hume are the only men thus far on
whom we can put much reliance.
Coming to the present century we examine first Ivanhoe by
chapters. The averages run: 129, 73, 106, 62, 56, 55, 98, 70,
61, 53. The sentence average is more stable, thus: 2.92, 2.03,
3.33, 2.19, 1.88, 2.16, 2.61, 2.25, 2.13, 2.1 1. Evidently Scott
clung with some monotony to the ideal of two sentences a para-
graph. The first five Essays of Elia yield the following results :
171, 134, 230, 147, 125. The averages by sentences are : 7.12,
5.00, 8.00, 5.57, 5.94. We try Irving's Sketch Book, the first five
sketches. Result: 157, 140, 137, 83, 104. The averages by
sentences are: 5.14,6.25,4.94,3.33,3.65. Thus far our own
century is no improvement — if improvement it be called — on
the eighteenth.
We try Macaulay ; the History of England by volumes.
Results: 258.11,251.52,325.44,336.50,306.90. This is remark
able. The averages for the first two volumes are practically the
same. Here the writer was governed by something very like a
rigid rhythmical law. A similar, but less strong, rhythmical
sense, appears in the last three volumes. But why the sudden
rise between the second and third volumes? Two reasons sug-
gest themselves. As Mr. Stephen somewhere remarks, Macau-
lay's fullness of knowledge began to hamper him a little in the
later volumes. In other words, he became somewhat verbose
from plenitude of things to say. Since, now, Macaulay wrote
primarily with the paragraph unit, the diffuseness would naturally
ffec^t unit first. He would naturally keep to his sentence
length — or does so, at any rate — but would use more proposi-
tions to amplify a given integral thought. Another reason,
though perhaps rather remote, suggests itself. Volume two was
finished by 1848. Four years later (July, 1852), after the mate-
rials for the third volume were collected and partly written up,
Macaulay broke down in health from the disease that finally ended
50 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
his life. For months before that time there are ominous passages
in his journal and letters, complaining that the task of composi-
tion is a burden, that he is no longer capable of vigorous exertion.
Now I do not wish to be understood as maintaining the existence
of any very close connection between paragraph-length and
heart-disease. But a tired man is likely to be loquacious, if he
tries to talk, and when a writer has incomplete control of his brain
he is likely to be at first diffuse in his composition, and later,
incoherent. I am aware that Trevelyan says of Macaulay : "The
habit of always working up to the highest standard within his
reach was so ingrained in his nature, that, however sure and
rapid might be the decline of his physical strength, the quality of
his productions remained the same as ever. Instead of writing
worse, he only wrote less. Compact in form, crisp and nervous
in style, these five little essays are everything which an article in
an Encyclopaedia should be." ' The five essays referred to are :
Atterbury, 1853, Bunyan^ 1856, Goldsmith, 1856, Doctor Johnson,
1856, William Pitt, 1859. It can hardly be granted that these
essays are as compact and crisp in style as the earlier essays. It
seems to me that proof enough to invalidate Trevelyan's position
on this point lies in the fact that Mr. Gerwig found that the per-
centage of simple sentences in the early essays is much higher
than in these later ones. It is worth while to quote Mr. Gerwig's
figures, which show a steady decrease in the percentage of simple
sentences. Now this decrease took place as Macaulay's physical
strength failed ; the figures are therefore favorable to the theory I
have set concerning the rise in paragraph -length.
When
Number
Av. Prcd. Simple
Work.
written.
periods.
per period, sent.
Macaulay,^ Royal Soc. of Literature
1823
100
2.03 44
Dante
1824
100
2.15 38
MUton
1825
895
2.07 38
Machiavelli
1827
693
1.88 47
History, Essay on
1828
719
2.18 40
^ Life and Letters of Lord Macaulay y p. 664.
* University Studies, Vol. II., No. I, p. 22.
When
written.
1828
Number
periods.
100
Av. Pred.
per period.
2.65
Simple
sent.
29
1843
918
2.31
32
1843
I331
2.22
32
1853
1854
1856
240
245
263
2.3s
2.19
2.29
34
31
33
PARAGRAPH-LENGTH AND SENTENCE-LENGTH 5 1
Work.
Dryden
HArblay
Addison
Atterbury
Bunyan
Goldsmith
Average 2.17 36
We shall hardly find another author as stable in his averages
as Macaulay. Carlyle shows pretty nearly the same average in
two books, Sartor (166.90) and the Revolution (160.31) ; but the
average in an early essay, Richter, 1827, is 250.62. Emerson's
American Scholar yields 184.60, the Divinity School Address 210.91
(10.10 sentences) and Self Reliance 201.12 (10.04 sentences).
We may not, therefore, conclude from the small number of
paragraphs we have been able to examine, that the paragraph-
length is relatively as constant as the sentence-length. But in
Macaulay and proportionately in authors of regular methods,
there is a general tendency toward approximate uniformity in the
paragraph -averages of different sections of work.
CHAPTER IV.
RECENT INVESTIGATIONS IN PROSE-FORM. THEIR BEARING
ON THE HISTORY OF THE PARAGRAPH.
§1.
The recent investigations that have most bearing on the his-
tory of the paragraph are those of Professor L. A. Sherman,' on
the questions of literary sentence-length in English prose, the
coordination, subordination, and suppression of clauses, and the
new articulation of clauses. Professor Sherman has demonstrated
that the English sentence has dropped about one-half its length
since Shakspere's time ; he holds that in the matter of connectives,
our prose has passed successively through a coordinative, a subor-
dinative, and a suppressive stage ; and that it has shown very
great decrease in formal predication.
Manifestly each of these lines of investigation has its bearing
on the development of the paragraph. The relation of the short
sentence to the paragraph is a vital one, and whatever causes have
produced the one have doubtless affected the other. The ques-
tion of the historical use of conjunctions — especially of inter-sen-
tential conjunctions — bears directly upon the history of coherence
in the paragraph. The question of the decrease of predication
affects the paragraph quite as vitally as these preceding questions,
though not quite so apparently. For, if an author omits many
predications within the sentence he has a type of mind which
will tempt him to omit predications between sentences, /. e. to
omit transitional sentences. Clearly the omission of transi-
tional sentences affects very emphatically the coherence of the
paragraph. We shall therefore examine Professor Sherman*s the-
ories at some length.
^Analytics of Literature ^ Chapters xix-xxvi. University Studiesyo\. I., Nos.
2 and 4.
52
RECENT INVESTIGA TIONS IN FROSE-FORM, 5 3
First, then, regarding the origin and tendency of the short
sentence. This sentence Slierman attributes to the introduction
of conversational style into literature. The explanation seems
to me correct, and the point important. Some stress, however,
must be laid on the probability, already pointed out on pages
44-46, that the final adoption of the short sentence and the para-
graph was partly due to despair on the part of the periodic
writers. These could not go on forever without seeing the
hopelessness of trying to introduce full Latin idiom into English ;.
nay, even of thinking with logical precision in a kind of sentence
devoid of most of the means of coherence so richly present in
the Latin sentence.
But Professor Sherman has also demonstrated that as the
short sentence is introduced the average sentence-length acquires
a very strong tendency to become a constant quantity in succes-
sive groups of, say, 500 periods or more. From this interesting
fact he concludes :
" The evidence seemed to indicate the operation of some
kind of sentence-sense, some conception or ideal of form which
if it could have its will, would reduce all sentences to procrustean
regularity." '
But it seems to me that this statement implies rather more
than is warranted by the mere tendency toward constancy in
successive large groups of periods. Is this tendency finally to
destroy the long sentence ? How are we to account for the long
sentence in the midst of such an oral style as Macaulay*s ? Is
it due merely to a survival of classical influence ? When our
prose has quite acquired conversational urbanity is the long sen-
tence, whether periodic or loose, to be a thing of the past ?
Perhaps the paragraph has something to do with the answer
to these questions. A sentence is long or short in Macaulay
according to its importance in the paragraph. A dozen
clauses may be bundled together in one period to show that
the whole group is no more emphatic than the neighboring
* University Studies^ Vol. I., No. 4, p. 353.
54 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
proposition of half a dozen words. For the sake of this sense
of proportion, Macaulay will make almost the same words a
whole period in one paragraph, a mere clause in the next.
In the best modern paragraphs I think it is, in general,
true, that the distance between full stops is inversely as the
emphasis of each included proposition. If this be the case, the
distances between periods will not soon be reduced ^to approxi-
mate uniformity, however much influence the oral tendency may
have upon the order of words in the sentence.
It will further on be seen that, while the English sentence-
average has pretty steadily decreased, and while it has kept the
tendency towards constancy that was fully developed by Swift's
day, yet, within the limits of the given series of sentences that
yields a given average, the degree of variability has steadily
increased. Macaulay's long sentences are very long, as indeed
Sherman has noted. It is perhaps a possible thing that the
time will come when the sentence-average will no longer be a
constant quantity in each author, but will be wholly regulated by
the paragraph-structure.
§ 2-
We are now ready to examine the bearing upon the para-
graph of the decrease in the use of conjunctions and of
the decrease in predications. But at the outset we find
both of these phenomena referred to by Professor Sherman
as belonging to the " analytic" or " oral " style. Before we can
make it clear whether these phenomena benefit or hurt the
paragraph-structure, we must know the exact meaning of these
terms "analytic'* and "oral," as applied to style. This we must
know, even at the risk of a long and tiresome detour.
Analysis means psychologically the process of abstraction —
the conscious recovery of the intermediate term or terms in the
process of association. Analytic thinking proceeds step by step,
with full consciousness of the relation between parts ; a style that
incarnates such thinking may be called analytic ; such a style is
abstruse, philosophic. On the other hand a thinker may proceed
RECENT INVESTIGA TIONS IN PROSE-FORM. 5 5
by relatively concrete terms ; he may not see the third term in
the process of association, but may pass intuitively to his remote
conclusion. In so far as a style reproduces this sort of thinking
it may be called synthetic or intuitive.
But it is possible and natural to use the terms, in criticism,
with a force exactly opposite to the strict psychological ones.
Sherman' speaks of an analytic style as synonymous with an
intuitive style. He is evidently brought to this apparent paradox
by having previously spoken of the short sentence as analytic,
the long one as synthetic. Yet his words on this point seem also
to have some psychological implication : —
"The analytical principle as observed in Channing and Macau-
lay appeared to mean. Put in a simple sentence no more than can
be brought before the mind pictorially or symbolically in a single
view. If this meaning be yet but potential, not yet translated
into successive propositions, let it be realized to the mind and
expressed by instalments in some logical order, each fact or
judgment, since an integral part of the whole, in a sentence by
itself. But the synthetic principle amounts to an impulse to
develop the whole meaning in some way within the limits of a
single sentence.*"
In this explanation of the analytical principle Professor Sher
man evidently means that the analytic style tends to ratiocination
— tends to follow the steps of the thought and express them all
so as to conduct the reader by easy stages. But is not this
kind of analytic manner the exact opposite of the analytic
manner described by Sherman elsewhere ? "The analytic
manner communicates as we have seen by points, but has
nothing to do with making the points large or small, frequent
or widely separated. It is the business of the reader to fill
them out to a superficies of sense.*' ^ "Analytic or intuitive
styles differ according to the leap or omission of thought
^Analytics^ p. 303.
^University Studies^ Vol. I., No. 4, p. 355.
'^Analytics, p. 301.
56 HISTORY OF THE ENGUSH PARAGRAPH,
between. It is the length of the leap rather than the shortness
of the periods that makes an author seem laconic. No one is
conscious of Bartol's staccato quality in passages where his
thought is most sustained. Champing, when he writes sen-
tences as short, but with lesser gaps of meaning, seems as
smooth as Newman."*
Evidently, then, the terms analysis and synthesis as applied
to style are likely to create confusion. For the immediate pur-
poses of this paper it seems better to substitute other terms,
granting, if need be, that the new terms are not intrinsically
better and are open to being called pedantic.
Let us have four new terms, two corresponding to analysis
and synthesis in forniy two to analysis and synthesis in thought.
To the style in which the sentence of maximum frequency
is short — say twenty words or less — let us assign the name
\^ Segregating. The opposite of this style, then, the style that
brings its clauses together in whole blocks (as old Thomas Fuller
would have said) or (as Minto has improved the expression) in
flocks, will be the Aggregating style. When a style proceeds by
leaps, omitting the intermediate steps, we may (speaking psycho-
logically, not metaphysically, of course) call it Intuitive; and its
opposite, which omits no step, we may call Redintegrating.
Nay, if this last named manner proceeds not by real and rational
analogies but by mere association of contiguity, we may indulge
in so large a name for it as Impartially Redintegrative. We
may save the word Abstract chiefly for the style whose vocabu-
lary is abstract ; and Concrete for the opposite style.
According to this cumbrous, but, I hope, definite terminology,
Macaulay's style would be at once segregating and redintegra-
ting. Macaulay asks you to supply nothing but conjunctions ;
nay, he often expands into a sentence of transition a relation
that De Quincey would get rid of with a however^ and that
Emerson would leave you to guess at. Landor would be intui-
tive, and, except in his most sustained passages, would doubtless
^AnalyticSy p. 303.
RECENT INVESTIGA TIONS IN PROSE-FORM. 5 7
be segregating as well. Carlyle in the French Revolution
would be intuitive and segregating, in Sartor Resartus intuitive
and aggregating. De Quincey would be redintegrating and
aggregating, in spite of strong flashes of imagination now and
then.
So much for the word analytic ; now for the word oral.' Pro-
fessor Sherman speaks of the analytic sentence as belonging to
the oral style. By analytic sentence in this sense he means pri-
marily the short sentence. " What makes short-period styles is the
oral sentence-sense given free play as in ordinary talk."' This
is easily understood and easily believed.
But there are other characteristics of the oral style. We
gather from one part of Professor Sherman's discussion that the
oral style is analytic, in the psychological sense — that it tends to
explain its subject by giving the successive steps by which the main
conclusions are reached. "Though it is much more convenient
to put integral thoughts in single sentences, such form manifestly
handicaps every reader to whom the thoughts are new. What I
may have in my mind cannot be transferred bodily to another's.
I can only use a series of signs from which the reader recon-
structs the fabric I have builded in my brain. But before he can
put together a thought identical with my own, I must evidently
take mine to pieces, and signify to him each part, and how it
must go into place. Thus, while the attainment of the meaning
to be expressed is a synthetic process, the first step in the act of
expression is clearly analytic." 3 in other words, the oral
style, in order to make perfectly clear to the reader the thought
that has been intuitively perceived, introduces a string of inter
mediate predications leading to a final and chief predication.
But in another place. Professor Sherman leads us to infer
'All discussion of the nature of oral style must of course be inadequate
until the psychologist and the physiologist settle by experiment certain elemen-
tary questions regarding the actual sentence of conversation, cf. p. 158.
* University Studies^ Vol. I., No. 4, p. 363.
"^ Analytics^ p. 287.
58 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
apparently the opposite. He has said that the course of English
prose reveals a great decrease in the use of verbs ; that, " If we note
the conversation of men dexterous with language, or the style of
writers not too formal or self-conscious, we shall observe many
expressions like *when a boy,* or * if in London,* or * because of
the failure,* etc. Each of these stands for what would have been
expressed in the stage just before by complete clauses : as, * when
I was a boy,* Mf I am or shall be in London,* * because A or B
failed,* and in a stage yet earlier by propositions joined by coor-
dinate connectives.**' Now he says : " The suppression of clauses
and economy of predication, we cannot doubt, are further man-
ifestations of the same instinct, which, as we have seen, has
relieved the English sentence of half its weight since Shake-
speare*s times, and is now interposing its veto against a higher
average than two predicates per sentence.** By "weight ** Pro-
fessor Sherman means both the number of clauses or predications
that sentences exhibit, and the number of words in their sentence-
averages.
In his chapter on " The Weight of Styles,** Professor Sherman
develops at some length this matter of predication-suppression ;
the investigation has been carried still farther by the recent thesis
of Mr. G. W. Gerwig,' On the Decrease of Predication and of
Sentence Weight in English Prose. The result of the investiga-
tions goes to show a steady increase in percentage of simple sen-
tences. In many authors it shows a very high per cent, of
"clauses saved ** — /. e. predications implied but not expressed.
The means by which notions can be conveyed without formal
predication are many : absolute constructions ; appositives ; con-
junctions without copulas ; prepositions for conjunctions, copu-
las, or conjunctions plus copulas ; phrases for clauses ; suggestive
words for phrases ; present and past participles. All of these
devices, with the exception of the use of present and perfect
active participles for temporal, conditional and concessive
^ Analytics ^ p. 277.
' University Studies ^ Vol. II., No. i.
RECENT INVESTIGATIONS IN PROSE-FORM. 59
clauses,' Professor Sherman apparently thinks of as belonging to
the organic oral style.
If now we revert to Professor Sherman's first reference to the
oral style as a process of analyzing complex units into integral
parts, and compare this view with the conception of the oral style
as suppressive of predication, are we not conscious of a lurking con-
tradiction — perhaps an undistributed middle in that phrase, oral
style? In the first case we have a style that assumes comparative
ignorance on the part of the reader, and only average acute-
ness. In the second we have a style that assumes more
and more knowledge, more and more intuitive power on the
part of the reader, and if we push the theory we may
have a style that would be possible only between imagina-
tive geniuses. In the first kind of oral style the reader supplies
next to nothing in the way of interpretation; in the second kind the
reader supplies next to everything. In the first sense Macaulay,
except for an occasional very long period, would be the typi-
cal oral writer. In the second sense perhaps Carlyle in the
French Revolution would be the type. The sentence-length in
the History of England is the same to a word as that of the
French Revolution; but the actual meaning conveyed by Carlyle's
sentence is certainly several times as much as that of Macaulay's.
Now, which of these styles is the true oral style ? Macaulay's
is far the easier to read, even if we make allowance for certain
idiosyncrasies in Carlyle's vocabulary and structure. The simple
fact is, indeed, that half of Carlyle's idiosyncrasy lies in the way
he evades predication by the use of significant, though odd and
irregular words. Since we must settle the question for ourselves,
so far as immediate use of terms is concerned, I should say that
Macaulay's style has the better claim to the adjective oral. He
knew that the use of many condensed expressions — clause-
evasions — was likely either to retard the immediate progress of
understanding, or to vitiate seriously the comprehension of the
* AnalyticSy p. 309, Footnote. Here these particular participial uses are
referred to as for the most part inorganic and unoral.
6o HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
thought if the rate of reading were increased. He assumed
small literary training or appreciation on the part of his
audience. To put it bluntly, he wrote down to them.
For a readable style must not be heavy — /'. e,, must not convey
unnecessary notions — nor, again, can it be very weighty — /. <?.,
convey many new notions in each sentence. But clause-evasion,
while it increases ease of reading when the clause suppressed can
be instantly supplied, does not permit the slow stream of thought
to eddy around the idea, as De Quincey would say, and so grasp
it if new. In Macaulay the percentage of clause-evasion is not
high ; according to Mr. Gerwig, the saving by " substitution of
present and past participles or by the use of appositives,"
amounts in the Essays to 5.06 per cent. White, of Selborne,
saves twice as much. Dr. Barrow nearer thrice, though both wrote
longer sentences and used more predications than Macaulay.
Greely, writing far fewer simple sentences than Macaulay, yet
reaches 17 per cent, of clause-evasions.
The oral style, then, as we shall use the term, will show the
segregating sentence, but the redintegrating method — short sen-
tences, closely consecutive. It will show an absolutely high
proportion of simple sentences, but not an absolutely high pro-
portion of clauses saved. When the short sentences omit the
minor steps of the logical order and there is made a strong
demand on the reader's interpretative powers, we shall speak of
the style as intuitive, with oral sentence-length. Emerson and
Bartol would be assigned to this style.
It might, indeed, be maintained that it is difficult to prove the
short sentence an absolute necessity to the oral style, even in this
limited sense. It might with some show of reason be asserted
that the real oral unit is the short, loose clause ; that the long,
loose sentence, with its succession of brief propositions, repre-
sents a very common phenomenon of conversation. In ora
narrative, for instance, the speaker often groups together great
numbers of clauses in this way, letting his voice fall only at the
end of the series. This would occur at least partly in proportion
RECENT INVESTIGATIONS IN PROSE-FORM, 6 1
as the apprehension of the audience was quick. With a duller
audience it might be necessary to let the voice fall after each
short clause, inflection thus aiding comprehension. But we may
consider this loose sentence as a species intermediate between the
bold oral style and the subtly subordinative literary style.
There is still another way of defining oral style — namely, to
make it a relative term that alters in value with the mental
powers of the audience. For in conversation our style is
supposedly dictated, to a large extent, by the rate of mental
response on the part of the hearer. We predicate interme-
diate steps — we explain, in short — or we assume such inter-
mediate steps, according to the presence or the absence of the
appreciative flash in the hearer's eye. Thus, in talking to
a person as well informed as we, we proceed with lightning
rapidity. We not only omit predicates, both immediate and
intermediate, but we indulge in all manner of contractions and
elisions, many of them highly unliterary, almost illiterate ; nay,
we convey as much by stress and gesture as by word. This is
one kind of oral style, to be sure ; if we carry the theory far
enough we can secure an oral style that is not style at all, as, for
instance, in talking to a superior who will guess one's meaning
from one's first word. Thus the oral style would increase in
intuitiveness just in proportion to the intuitive powers of the
audience.
In the actual case of the history of our literature the oral
style, in this relative sense of the word, has undergone certain
manifest changes according to the change in audience. Begin-
ning with the change from the scholastic audience of the six-
teenth century to what Mr. Bagehot would call the masculine,
common-sense audience of the eighteenth, the oral style would
be progressively analytic — /. <?., segregating and redintegrating.
Proceeding from the Augustan prose to the latest subtleties of
what Mr. Saintsbury would call ** marivaudage," the oral style
would be progressively synthetic — /. e., intuitive and segregating
for one species of it, intuitive and aggregating for another species.
62 HISTORY OF THE EXGLISH PARAGRAPH
The most of Professor Sherman's remarks tend toward a
definition of oral style as thus relative and elastic. He says,
"Heaviness then is a relative term. The styles of those who, like
Newman, address the educated exclusively, will not be heavy to
their proper public though unintelligible to common readers."'
But again, exactly to the contrary of this : " To comprehend a
style which condenses clauses to phrases requires as much literary
preparation as to read Keats."' With these sentences compare
his one explanation (p. 57) of the style as analytic, and his other
explanation of it (p. 58) as clause-suppressive. But in his latest
article on the subject he has a sentence or two which look toward
calling a halt to the extension of the term to all intuitive styles.
" Some of the most polished of present stylists studiously eschew
seeming better than conversational writers. The style of the
future is likely to be yet more informal and easy than the best
examples of this sort now extant. It will not probably abound
in numerical averages as low as BartoFs or Emerson's and will be
less disjointed and staccato. An informal organic sentence need
not be long, but must not be weighed down with predications.
Effective individual styles not hard to find in the periodical lit-
erature of these days will average, perhaps, as high as twenty
words of numerical length, yet show not above 1.60 predications
per sentence, nor less than 65 per cent, of simple sentences." '
This is as near as Professor Sherman comes to discussing the
question of what percentage the oral style should show of implied
predications and what percentage of simple sentences to a given
complex thought. The passage is at least less trustful of the intui-
tive manner being properly oral than this sentence from the
Analytics : " Hence the ideal style will have a maximum num-
ber of intuitive sentences ; and that style is lightest that comes
nearest to the first impressions of the mind." In the limited
view of the oral style taken in our own discussion, "the style that
' University Studies^ Vol. I., No. 4, p. 363.
^Analytics, p. 296.
3 University Studies, Vol. I., No. 4, p. 361.
RECENT INVESTIGATIONS IN PROSE-FORM, 63
comes nearest to the first impressions of the mind '* will never be
the lightest until the popular audience becomes one of literary
experts. That the increasing culture of the people perhaps
tends towards such an event may be true. But meantime the
oral style of the future, while not sacrificing quite so much for
clearness as Macaulay's, will probably be very far more expansive
tha^Emerson's.
i^o focalize the discussion upon the question of the paragraph
is now easy. The oral style proceeds, as we have seen, by
expanding into short sentences a given integral thought. When,
with Temple, the paragraph may be said to acquire unity, each
paragraph comes to represent an integral thought thus internally
segregated. The principle to be formulated then is : From the
moment of the establishment of unity, in the development of the Eng-
lish paragraph, the oral sentence-structure means decreasing the
number of predications in the period and increasing the number of
propositions in the paragraph, in proportion to the author^ s conception
of his reader* s intuitive power: it being further premised that the
intuitive power of the writer exceeds that of the reader.
We have, therefore, found from this long and diffuse discus-
sion, that the oral structure, /. e, a. redintegrating and segrega-
ting style, is an essential feature of the best paragraph ; though we
shall not deny that good paragraphs may have a large number of
intuitive statements. We have now to inquire how far the omis-
sion of conjunctions is consistent with such a style ; whether
coherence is hurt or helped by this omission.
Professor Sherman says : "As there are no conjunctions in the
mind — that is, no pictorial or symbolic representations of them
as ideas — the style that most nearly follows thought will omit
them when possible, or where formal merely." ' There certainly
can be no doubt that many of the most effective recent styles
show a minimum of conjunctions. But is it quite sure, that
because conjunctions do not occur to the mind as substantive
images, they are usually formal and useless ? It is a hard thing
^ Analytics^ p. 305.
64 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
— some have said an impossible thing — to say how a complex
thought " looks " in the mind. But it is probably safe to say
that the minute we try to transfer that elusive thing, a thought,
into the mind's eye, it seems to take the form of a mental image
in which the notions are in some way groupcjd or graded. We are
conscious that some ideas are principal and some subordinate. The
more clearly we preceive these inter-relations of ideas, the more
analytic and logical is our thinking. To see them at all clearfly
in their grouping requires a quiet eye, a dispassionate mind.
The moment thought is disturbed by emotion away fly the deli-
cate middle-shades of the picture ; we see the substantive points
in the istream of thought, but we see them so strongly that we do
not notice their inter-relations. Now conjunctions are the
result of an effort to express these un-named relations. The
sense of relation may, indeed, be so strong that a mind like De
Quincey*s will take a long sentence in the effort to capture a
gradation that the conjunction is not equal to. But when the
mind is impassioned the sense of proportion between ideas
is badly disturbed. The mind cares nothing for the inter-
relation of facts — it wants the facts themselves. Accordingly
impassioned prose — the literature of the will — may omit con-
junctions with good effect. There are also a few relations so
obvious that the conjunctions which express them can safely be
omitted in any prose. Such is the relation of cause and effect,
which is sufficiently conveyed by juxtaposition of cause and effect
in separate clauses. But for the most part prose cannot be
accurate without the use of conjunctions. Prose that omits them
runs the risk of over-statement or under-statement. Prose that
can safely run this risk is limited to a field that forms but a small
part of the best literature.
Accordingly we are not surprised to see that, of the men whom
Professor Sherman quotes as illustrative of the new articulation,
most of those who show low percentage of conjunctions are not
the ones whom we praise most as stylists. The list includes
Gladstone, Lowell, Emerson, Theodore Parker, Bartol, T. T-
RECENT IN VESTIGA TIONS IN PROSE-FORM. 6 5
Munger, and Dr. Holmes. I am not saying that these men
are poor stylists ; but I am saying that they could hardly
have been able — with their sparing use of conjunctions — to
get the exquisitely true and clear effects that Newman, Pater,
and Arnold secure. But let us also confess that presence of con-
junctions in quantities is no proof of subtlety ; else why should
Donald G. Mitchell stand next, in Sherman's list, to Newman,
and before Pater ? Nor let any man accuse me of putting down
Lowell as a lesser critic than Arnold, simply because Lowell's
thought is occasionally too fertile for his style to be exquisitely
true and clear.
We now turn to consider the oral style as affecting proportion
in the paragraph. The hurt that the oral style has done on the
whole to the proportion of the paragraph, is, out of all comparison,
less than its beneficial effect. But in such writers as use the short
sentence to a maximum degree, the emphasis of the paragraph is
evenly spread over each proposition. The question will be dis-
cussed with somewhat more fullness under the head of Macaulay.
For the present it is enough to say that the asyndetic structure and
the exclusive use of the short sentence are " terse and intense
forms," and as such have their dangers. It is hardly enough to
say, with Sherman, ' " We are not to write always in terse and
intense forms. The intermediate notes are normal both to those
who have as yet not passed beyond them, and upon occasion to
all of us." It is much nearer the truth to say as Sherman at last
does : ' " Indeed, the ideal style is either coordinative, subordina-
tive, suppressive, asyndeton, and at times even, for a little perhaps,
synthetic, according to selective acts of the mind that are indeter-
minate, or at least not yet determined."
Yes, man lives by many a generous idea that can never be
put into short sentences.
^ Analytics^ p. 312.
^ Analytics y p. 312.
CHAPTER V.
ALFRED TO TYNDALE.
The related paragraph plays no structural part in Old Eng-
lish prose. There is no conscious attempt to advance by stages.
The chief merit of the prose is sequence — not exactly coherence,
which assumes some logical method — but general consecutive-
ness. In this quality and in the short sentence there are,
however, present two prerequisites of paragraph structure. But
this old prose is by no means utterly formless. In much
of it there is a kind of instinctive sentence-grouping that reveals
the natural tendency of the language toward the paragraph and
away from the long period. If this seems fanciful to anyone let
him take the unbroken text of the preface to Alfred's version of
the Cura Pastor alls and try whether it be harder to determine the
natural divisions of this discourse, or those of a chapter in Cap-
grave or Malory.
The Old English writers are, however, the originators of our
isolated paragraph. By this I mean that many of their so-called
chapters are so short as to illustrate the structure of the isolated
paragraph. Chapters of 200 words, like many in Alfred's Bede^
are not chapters in the modern sense ; they are tiny whole
compositions, corresponding as inventional units to that particu-
lar modern editorial paragraph which, set off by itself, is at once
complete in itself and related to its neighbors.
The longer pieces of prose are usually broken up by the
paragraph- marks of the rubricator. Whether the author ever
dictated the position of these marks it is impossible to say.
There are certain autograph manuscripts that contain such marks,
but the fact proves nothing. There were four distinct uses of the
marks : {a) to note a logical section ; {B) to note an emphatic
point ; (c) formally to distinguish sacred names ; (d) to orna-
66
ALFRED TO TYNDALE. 67
ment and distinguish titles, colophons, etc. Of course manu-
scripts differ in the degree of success with which these points,
especially the first, are attained. Some are very stupidly
divided, others very cleverly. In some the emphasis mark
predominates, in others it is almost absent. In most manuscripts
all four principles are apparent.
The habit of marking for emphasis, whether at the beginning
of a rational section or in the midst of it, was not without its
influence in after days. The emphasis-tradition is in full play
even in Milton. It is partly responsible for one glaring fault of
the sixteenth century — that of beginning a paragraph one
sentence late, so to speak ; of not noticing the turn in the dis-
course till this arrives at an emphatic new point.
In spite of the emphasis-principle, it is not rash to say that
the Old English paragraph has in a general way good unity of
subject.' Coherence and proportion and mass it has not.
ALFRED.
Of works by Alfred there are but three contemporary manu-
scripts, namely, the Hatton and Cotton MSS. of the translation
of Gregory's Pastoral Care, and the Lauderdale MS. of the
Orosius.
The last named MS. forms the basis of Sweet's text of the
Orosius (E. E. T. S. 79). Sweet has broken the text into para-
graphs that make natural steps in the story. Out of curiosity I
made a count of words, sentences, paragraphs, sentence-length
and paragraph-length in the first book, according to the Lauder-
dale MS. and Sweet's pointing. The result was 9862 words, 381
sentences, 66 paragraphs ; average sentence-length, 25.8 ; para-
graph-length in words, 151.68, in sentences, 5.8. The limits of
' I have felt very strongly the difficulty of making other than very general
statements concerning the presence or absence of unity in an author's para-
graphs. It is not a very hard matter to decide whether or not a paragraph has
digressions ; but it is a far harder task to observe and state all the principles on
which a composition may properly be divided. In the main, I have attempted to
distinguish but two general types of unity — the purely logical and the rhetorical
or picturesque.
68 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
word-length in the paragraph (34-453) show a field of variability
less wide than Channing*s or De Quincey's. If we take the
sentence-length as in any sense organic (as I, for one, should be
inclined to do), the figures go to show that Alfred did not know
enough Latin to hurt his English structure, many commentators
to the contrary notwithstanding. To illustrate, let me quote a
passage (Sweet's ed., p. 171). In translating, the king has para-
phrased (rather freely) a Latin sentence of forty-six words, by a
very fair English paragraph of four sentences or ninety-one
words.
Anno ab urbe condita CCCCLXXXIII, Mamertinis auxilia
contra copias et Ap. Claudium consulem cum exercitu misere
Romani : qui tarn celeriter Poenos superavit, ut ipse rex ante se
victum quam congressum fuisse prodiderit ; qui exin, cum pacem
rogaret, ducentis argenti talentis muitatus, accepit.
-^fter |)8em fe Romeburg getimbred wses feower hunde wintrum
7 Lxx(x)iii, sendon hie him Appius Claudius jone consul mid
fultume. Eft, fa hie togaidereward foron (mid heora folcum),
fa flugon Pene, swa he eft selfe saedon, 7 his wundredan, faet hie
aer flugon aer hie togaedere genealaecten. For faem fleame Hanna,
Pena cyning, mid eallum hio folce wearS Romanum to gafolgil-
dum, 7 him aelc geare gesealde twa hund talentana siolfres : on
aelcre anre talentan waes Lxxx punda.
In the translation of the Pastoral Care, the paragraph -mark
plays no part. But the preface falls naturally into excellent
sentence-groups that show something like real coherence and
explicitness of reference.
The translation of the Boethius is not paragraphed in the MS.
There are a few sections, e.g. in Otho, a. vi., before § 2, chap.
37 ; § 4, chap. 39 ; § 2, chap. 40. The paragraphing of the
Bohn text is entirely the work of the editor.
The Old English version of Bede's History has until recently
been ascribed with confidence to Alfred, on the authority of
^Ifric and William of Malmesbury. Dr. Thomas Miller, how-
ever, in his recent edition (E. E. T. S. 95, pp. Ivi., Ivii.) believes
ALFRED TO TYNDALE. 69
it to be of Anglian origin. Miller*s text is collated from (a) the
Tanner 10 of the Bodleian, {b) the Corpus Christi College,
Oxford, {c) the Cambridge — Kk. 3, 18. The Cambridge alone
numbers the chapters. In making a count from Book I., I have
therefore followed the chaptering of the Cambridge. I have a
few times departed from Miller's pointing, but not to make any
sentence shorter. The QucBstiones of Augustine, placed by
Miller in Cap. 27, I have not counted, since in the MSS. they
stand at the end of Book III. The first book then contains 6898
words, — since only twenty-one of the original thirty-one chap-
ters remain in the Cambridge MSS. This gives an average
of 222.5 words to the paragraph, the limits of fluctuation being
49-838. There are 7.84 sentences in the paragraph. These
figures, like those of the OrosiuSy are suggestive of nineteenth
century lengths.
There are few exceptions to unity in the paragraphs of the
Bede, The style is less flexible and subordinating than that of
the OrostuSy the coordinative stage of the language being rather
painfully evident. There are 506 ands in the first book, or one
to every twelve words.
WULFSTAN.
The Homilies of Wulfstan, written in vigorous native prose,
are extant in numerous manuscripts. None of the homilies
shows many paragraphs — most have two or three. The general
structure of the prose is logical. As Napier ' has pointed the
sentences and placed the indentations, both sentence and para-
graph are longer and yet compacter than those of the Orosius,
vELFKIC.
The manuscripts of ^Ifric's Lives of Saints are not para-
graphed. The chapters of the Latin Grammar are numerically
divided into sections, and there are a few other paragraph -marks.
But the book is not literature and its paragraphs are not to be
considered.
* Wulfstan^ herausgegeben von Arthur Napier, Berlin, 1883.
70 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Sweet, in editing selected Homilies from the Cambridge MS.
(unparagraphed), has broken the text into sections, which I have
counted, again out of curiosity. The first nine homilies contain
18,854 words, 723 sentences. The sentence-length is therefore
25.8 words; the paragraph-length is 176.2 words, 6.75 sentences.
Both sentence and paragraph are slightly longer than Alfred's
(also punctuated by Sweet) ; but if we consider the increase in
learning that occurred in the intervening century, it is surprising
that the increase in the length of the sentence is so small.
^Ifric's style exhibits decided advance over his predecessors
in power of graceful transition. One paragraph leads to another,
and there are varied devices of explicit reference.
THE ANCREN RIWLE.
After a long period barren of prose, we come to the Ancren
Riwle, 1220. Here we have an alert and cultivated style. The
MSS. are divided systematically into books, and these into simple
capital-paragraphs. The main fault of this style is the abrupt
transition between these paragraphs.
In the Ancren Riwie, the English sentence-length is still
untouched by Latin influence. The first 61 paragraphs (509
sentences, 12,0^9 words) yield a sentence of 23.67, a paragraph
of 197.5. The sentence is the same, within a quarter of a word,
as that of Macaulay's England. The paragraph is four words
longer than that of Emerson's Self Reliance, eight words shorter
than that of Arnold's Literary Influence of Academies.
THE AYENBITE OF INWYT.
Dan Michel's Ayenbite of Inwyt, 1340, is a wooden piece of
prose. The paragraphing is systematic to the extreme, each
section being introduced by a set phrase (usually a numerical
one) and forming one step in the long list of virtues and vices.
The average length of the sections is only 131 words, yet a
quarter of them have no unity. The sentence average is low —
only 21 words. It is noticeable that the paragraphing does not
ALFRED TO TYNDALE. 71
follow that of the French original, if that happens to be repre-
sented by MS. Cleopatra Av. Fol. 17,713.
MANDEVILLE.
The Voiage and Travaile "WdL^ -wriiten about 1356. The Eng-
lish version was first printed by Pynson. The edition of 1725
(7) based upon Cotton MS., Titus c. xvi, and collated with other
MSS. and printed versions, is the standard edition, and was
reprinted by Halliwell-Phillips, 1839, 1866, 1883.
This editor in his Additional Notes says cheeringly : " The
chapters are very differently divided in various MSS. Some
have no divisions at all." I have, however, counted ten para-
graphs, from Halliweirs edition of 1839, ^^ show something of
the sentence-length of this early and important piece of prose.
The first ten paragraphs average 337 words, 9.5 sentences, the
sentence-length being 35.48. Although this is a higher average
than any we have yet found, and manifestly shows Latin influ-
ence, it is still suspiciously short for the time and the man, and
leads us to fear editorial tampering.
WICLIF.
Wiclif s Bible is divided into chapters, but not into para-
graphs or "verses." Most of his other works are scantily
paragraphed. In these original works his unit of composition
was evidently large and its construction logical. So good is the
analytic consecutiveness of his work that it would be possible to
divide it into reasonable stadia. By modern principles of punc-
tuation his average sentence is not excessively long ; it varies
from 30 to 35 words in different essays. This moderate length
is the more noticeable because the diction is freely latinized.
CHAUCER.
The prose works of Chaucer are four : the translation of
Boethius, De Consolatione Philosophic; the Melibceus and the
Persones Tale ; the Treatise on the Astrolabe, dedicated to his
son.
{
72 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH
The -5^<fM/aj has been edited by Morris (E. E. T. S.) from the
Brit. Mus. Add. MS. 10,340, and the Cambridge Univ. Lib. MS.,
I., 3, 21. In the Cambridge MS. the parallel oblique virgules
(y^) are used in place of the \ In the Additional MS. the rubri-
cator has been so lavish with his vermilion, that but for his
rational work in the latter part we should think him gone
paragraph-mad. At first every sentence begins with the
mark. Of the first 100 paragraphs only three have two sen-
tences each, one has three, and ninety-six, one ! The average
length of these 100 is 29.51 words. Later on, e, g., Morris,
p. 164 ff., the paragraphing is good ; but, if we take the MS. as
a whole, evidently most of the paragraphs are false. Some ardent
Chaucerian monk thought every sentence worth emphasis ; and
nine times in 100 paragraphs he puts for emphasis a second
mark within the line.
The two prose pieces in the Canterbury Tales are differently
divided in different MSS., but always somewhat arbitrarily. The
judgment shown by the rubricators of the Melibosus is particu-
larly bad. The paragraphing of the Persones Tale is better,
though not uniformly so. By the Harleian MS. this tale yields
a paragraph -average of 8.26 sentences, — about 290 words.
Chaucer's prose sentence in this tale is only a word shorter than
Mandeville's. On the other hand the sentence of the Boethius is
considerably shorter than Mandeville's.
The Astrolabe is so far from being a piece of orderly prose,
much less literature, that I have not attempted to find in it a
paragraph-sense so manifestly lacking even in Chaucer's best
writing.
PECOCK.
Reginald Pecock's Repressour of Over Much Blaming of the
Clergy, was edited by Churchill Babington, and published in the
Rolls series in i860. The paragraph -marks, alternately red and
blue, are distributed in the Canterbury MS. with no particular
skill. The modern editor, like so many other modern editors,
has felt free to print his text without a trace of these marks, and
ALFRED TO TYNDALE. 73
to substitute paragraphing of his own. The effort only assures
us that Pecock's unit was the long period. Babington's para-
graphs average about 262 words, and he is not able to reduce the
sentence to less than 61. Pecock*s work is one oF the first exam-
ples of purely controversial prose. His order of procedure is
formal, and his good logic makes his work divisible into rough
stages.
CAPGRAVE.
The MS. of Capgrave's Chronicle I have not been able to con-
sult. The edition of Hingeston (Rolls series, 1858) prints a page
of it in facsimile. Here the first letter in each sentence is marked
by a red stroke. For this or for some other unaccountable rea-
son, Hingeston tends to paragraph each sentence by itself.
MALORY.
Caxton'sZ^ Mort Darthure waS" admirably edited and reprinted
in 1889, thanks to the conscientiousness of Dr. Oskar Sommer.
The most of the chapters are unbroken, as is the long preface
of Caxton. The paragraphs in the remaining chapters are indi-
cated sometimes by Caxton's mark [P. 11, Fig. 36] at the head of
a line after spacing in the preceding line, sometimes by the mere
mark in the midst of a line, sometimes by the mark and a short
space in the midst of a line. The narrative is remarkably sequent,
and the chapters have a certain unity. The paragraph- marks,
delicious as their glossy thickness looks to the eye of the book-
lover who turns the pages, are quite as likely to serve the pur-
pose of mere emphasis as to guide the eye to a new section. But
it is half the pleasure of reading to watch these signboards of
Caxton's naive taste, and see how unerringly he plumps you down
a fat mark at the exciting moment.
FABYAN.
Pynson's edition (15 16) of Fabyan's Concordance of Histories,
was carefully reprinted by Henry Ellis in 181 1. In this edition
the paragraph- mark is used only before titles, etc.; indentation
marks the paragraphs. In the first part of the book these are \
74 HISTORY OF THE EXGLISH PARAGRAPH.
short ; the breaks become rarer as the writer approaches the
events of his own day, and when he moves out of his usual cold
and formal style into some show of enthusiasm he forgets to par-
agraph at all. In the early part of the work the unity of subject
is almost unimpeachable ; in the latter part there is no paragraph-
unity whatever. The sentence is ponderous, and often confused
with the paragraph. Sherman found its average length to be
63.02.
MORE.
The first English version of the Utopia was made by Ralph
Robinson. Robinson's second edition (1556) has been reprinted
by Arber. The ^ ^ in shape much like Caxton's, appears before
each main section. Indentation is employed but sparingly, but
always when the words are those of a new speaker in dialogue.
The real steps are indicated •by marginal notes.
More's best English appears in \^^ Historic of Richard III, ,
where the idiomatic short sentences give something like propor-
tion to the long sections. His most logical paragraphing, how-
ever, occurs in the polemical tracts. Here the steps are short,
the arrangement of the sentences is compact, and the whole
effect animated.
CHAPTER VI.
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE.
Before Tyndale the paragraph cannot be said to have any
structural character. Those qualities which the old English
prose did contribute to the modern unit, namely, the qualities of
consecutiveness and loose order of propositions, came to their
first culmination of development in the style of Tyndale. And
in the long period from Tyndale to Temple we have the battle-
ground where the principles of the modern unit were victorious
in a contest with various enemies. At the beginning of this
period stands our first tolerable paragrapher, Tyndale ; at the end
of it stands our first recognized organizer of the paragraph. Tem-
ple. The old English traditions represented in Tyndale were
perpetuated by one line of vernacular writers throughout the
Elizabethan and Jacobean period, and opposed by another line.
The contest has ended when we reach Temple, and the older
tradition is victor.
TYNDALE.
The Obedience of a Christian Man.
Total paragraphs considered- lOO
Average words per paragraph 204.48
Average sentences per paragraph 6.45
Average words per sentence 31 '72
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 8
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length. . . . 33-450
In Tyndale*s New Testament^ 1525 (Arber's reprint), the
Caxton mark is uniformly employed, and yet nearly always it is
preceded by a spaced line. The index is also used, both for
emphasis and for reference. The paragraphs are shorter than
those of the 161 1 version, and are not subdivided.
Of the Obedience I consulted Day*s edition, 1572. The para-
graphing is admirable for Tyndale's time, and good if it is Day's
75
76 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
and not Tyndale*s. At least 75 per cent, are loose. Each
topic is logically expanded by illustration, defense, etc. Of
the 347 paragraphs in the book about 25 per cent, are of the
periodic type, and perhaps 10 per cent, follow a strictly inductive
order.
Parallel construction occurs frequently, owing partly to imita-
tion of Hebrew models, partly to the writer^s natural oratorical
directness. It is often extended to groups of paragraphs — each
being made to correspond in arrangement with its predecessor.
The following example will give an idea of the internal parallel-
ism ; the order of course is periodic. " Who dried up the Red
Sea? Who slew Goliath? Who did all those wonderful deeds
which thou readest in the Bible? Who delivered the Israelites
evermore from thraldom and bondage, as soon as they repented
and turned to God? Faith verily, and God's truth, and the
trust in the promises which he had made. Read the xith of
Hebrews for thy consolation."
LATIMER.
First two Sermons before Edward, (Arber reprint.)
Whole number of paragraphs 116
Whole number of words 13621
Whole number of sentences 666
Average words in paragraph 1 17.42
Average sentences in paragraph 5.74
Average words in sentence 20.45
Sentence-length of first sermon 23.76
Sentence-length of second sermon i8.-|-
Paragraph-length of first sermon 242.68 (28 T[s)
Paragraph-length of second sermon 77«55 (88 ^[s)
Average predications per sentence ( 4.75
Per cent, of simple sentences (Gerwig) -j 13
Per cent, of clauses saved ( 2.78
Latimer's style, as appears partly from the sentence-length,
is colloquial and vernacular. Accordingly when his paragraphs
are good they are modern in tone and are really admirable. But
great unevenness marks them in unity, as in length. The coher-
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE. 77
ence is due, not to connectives, but to the impassioned rush of
the thought.
CRANMER.
Answer to Gardiner, I., The Sacrament.
Total paragraphs considered lOO
Total words considered I3»775
Average words per paragraph I37«75
Average sentences per paragraph 3.70
Average words per sentence 37«22
Per cent, single-sentence paragraphs 17
Cranmer is our first great master of the loose sentence. It is
not uncommon to find in him a loose sentence of more than 100
words, put together with much skill in avoidance of tags — a skill
elsewhere unknown in his day — and with a sense of prose rhythm
highly remarkable in any day. Since his paragraph is short, this
gift at the long loose sentence is often no help to his paragraph.
In the best sections the rhythm extends to the whole, sentence
modifying sentence as subtly as Ruskin's do.
Cranmer's sequence is such as might be expected from a clear
and orderly mind. The rare dislocations occur, as in the case
of Tyndale, from unconscious reversion to certain fixed moral
themes. The coherence is largely dependent upon modern
devices — inversions, demonstratives, etc., rather than conjunc-
tions. And is the one coordinate that is abused as an initial con-
nective. The per cent, of initial illatives is small, probably not
over five per cent. The great majority of the paragraphs are loose.
ASCHAM.
Toxophilus, 1544. Arber's reprint, 1868.
Total paragraphs considered 100
Total words considered I3»585
Total sentences considered 315
Average words per paragraph 135-85
Average sentences per paragraph 3.15
Average words per sentence 43-13 ^
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 9
Limits of fluctuation in word-length of paragraph.. 10-564
^ Sherman found 49.60, for 500 periods.
78 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Scholemaster, 1570. Arber's reprint, 1870.
Total paragraphs 329
Total words c. 47,250
Average words per paragraph c. 143.62
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 18
Per cent, of simple sentences (19
Average predications per sentence (Gerwig) } 3.49
Percent, of clauses saved / 4.31
Though the Scholemaster was not printed till Ascham had
been dead two years, the paragraphing shows no signs of having
been tampered with ; for the method in this book is the same as
that in the Toxophilus, written twenty years before, namely that of
paragraphing the smallest possible stadia ; and the word-length
is about the same in both books, although the first is dialogue.
The shortness of these stadia has led Professor Sherman ^ to say
that out of 329 paragraphs in the Scholemaster Ascham admits
148 false ones. I suppose Professor Sherman means that these
brief paragraphs should have been grouped into larger ones. He
further says that in at least fifty-five cases the period and the para-
graph are wrongly treated as one. For one I should defend a
good share of these single-sentence paragraphs as either marking
true stadia or good transitions. Some of the others I should
agree in assigning to bad logic. The rest may be explained by
remembering the emphasis-tradition which we have noticed as a
legacy from Old English rubricators. Such sentences as the fol-
lowing Ascham paragraphed (sometimes with the obsolete ^) not
out of logical confusion, but to make them prominent, in accord-
ance with a use of the paragraph then perfectly understood but
now forgotten : —
" This he confesseth himself, this he uttereth in many places,
as those can tell best who use to read him most."
"The like diligence I would wish to be taken in Pindar and
Horace, an equal match for all respects."
" Budaeus in his commentaries roughly and obscurely, after
^ Analytics, p. 291.
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE. 79
his kind of writing ; and for the matter, carried somewhat out of
the way in overmuch misliking the imitation of Tully.
" Phil. Melancthon, learnedly and truly.
" Camerarius largely with a learned judgment, but somewhat
confusedly and with over-rough a style.
" Lambucus largely, with a right judgment, but somewhat a
crooked style."
The trouble with Ascham*s style is, however, less that his par-
agraphs are too short than that his sentences are too long. A
sentence of nearly fifty words leaves no room for proportion in a
paragraph of 140.
The naivete of Ascham's manner precludes any complex
coherence, and involves great abuse of conjunctions. Sherman '
has noted *that 61 out of 329 paragraphs in the Scholemaster
begin with ands\ and that" 24 paragraphs begin with buts^
six with yets. If now we observe the use of sentence-con-
nectives (not clause-connectives) in 300 sentences of the Tox-
ophilus^ we shall find that 168 of the 300 periods are connected
by conjunctions or brief conjunctive phrases. The list is varied,
and serves to make the reference very explicit, in spite of the
abuse of coordinatives. Nearly all of these connectives are initial,
as will appear from the list given below, where the internal sen-
tence-connectives are placed in the second column. From the
total number (181) 13 should be deducted for repetitions (by
double connectives), to get the number of connected sentences.
Sentence -Connective. Initial. Interior.
But (yea but) 23
For 30
And 49
In dede 4
Also . . 6
Yet 8 2
Contrariwise i
So 4
Thus I
^ Analytics y p. 271.
* Analytics, p. 427.
So HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
SENTEN-CE-CoNXEcn\'E. Initial. Interior.
Now 7
Therefore 15 2
Then 3 i
Will 6
First I 3
Again 4
Furthermore i
Moreover 2
Wherefore i
At the last . . i
Likewise 2 i
Nor 2
To be short . . i
Ascham's rhythm in the sentence and the paragraph is monot-
onous. He has plenty of balanced Euphuistic sentences, that
help his coherence, but the balance is monotonous. And where
else in the language but in the Scholemaster can be found an author
who will write you seven consecutive paragraphs of exactly twenty-
five sentences each, the group being followed by three paragraphs
of just fifty sentences each ? I half suspect that Ascham (or the
printer) told those groups off on his fingers.
On the whole, Ascham *s place is midway between the vernac-
ular writers to whom the paragraph is a natural structure, and the
Latinists, who have no paragraph-sense at all.
HOLINSHED.
Chronicle, i577-
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average number words per paragraph c. 204
The marginal note is rarely used ; the old mark ^ (single-stemmed) less
rarelv.
The paragraphing of Holinshed is monotonously regular. The
narrative paragraphs are often good in unity and in concentra-
tion — as for example the well-known account of Macbeth. In
the descriptive passages there are numerous digressions, and the
dramatic grouping of details, that marks the best narrative pas-
sages, is lacking.
/
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE, 8 1
STOW.
Summarie of the Chronicles of England, 1561.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average words per paragraph c. 186
Average sentences per paragraph c. 3.26
Average words per sentence c. 57
Per cent. of. single-sentence paragraphs 41
The paragraphing of Stow's Chronicle (1561) is inorganic
and false. The author unnecessarily confounds the sentence with
the paragraph. The best that can be said of the style is that its
profuse use of subordinating conjunctions keeps the coherence
tolerably good.
LYLY.
Euphues, B. I., Euphues and his Euphoebus, Euphues and Athos,
Letters.
Total paragraphs considered 279
Total sentences considered 1600
Average words per sentence (Sherman) 36.83
Average words per paragraph c. 21 1.03
Average sentences per paragraph 5.73
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 33
Average predications per sentence T 3.50
Per cent, of simple sentences (Gerwig) •< 17
Per cent, of clauses saved ( 10.21
The paragraphing of Euphues, B. I., and Euphues and his
Euphosbus, is regular, 4.87 sentences being the average in the
first case, 4.10 sentences in the second. In Euphues and Athos
the average rises to 5.54 sentences, and in the diffuse style of the
Letters it mounts to 10.44 sentences. Taking Euphues as Lyly's
typical piece of prose, we find some improvement over Ascham
in general paragraphic structure. The sentence has shortened
and the paragraph lengthened. Lyly*s sentence, however, is still
in bondage to the colon, and we find a very high per cent, of
single-sentence sections.
The' unity of the paragraphs is wider than Ascham's — the
per cent, of false sections is reduced. But there are plenty of
82 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
digressions. Paragraphing for emphasis is rare, allhough the
obsolete paragraph -mark is occasionally found in the text. A
common violation of unity occurs in paragraphing a sentence
that introduces a speech. In the formal manner of Euphuism
such introductory sentences are felt as transitional paragraphs.
Of Lyly's coherence a good word may be said in one partic-
ular. If, on one hand, the balanced structure tends to make
the flow of sequence intermittent, on the other, the habitual
parallel construction constantly assures the reader of the general
onward movement. Other means of coherence are slighted ;
particularly, initial connectives.
The less said of Lyly*s proportion and massing, the better.
His excessive illustration spoils both. His introductions are
tedious, and, though there is usually a sentence-topic, the attempt
to find it is sometimes to hunt for a needle in a havstack.
GOSSOX.
Gosson's School of Abuse shows a sentence of about 60
words and a paragraph of something like 288. The paragraph
is the unit of division, since there are no chapters. Gosson's
Euphuism is strong enough to keep his paragraphs good in
parallel structure. But his divisions are mechanical, and the
unity so defective that only the marginal notes keep the reader
from floundering hopelessly.
SIDNEY.
Arcadia, 1590.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average words per paragraph c. 444
Average sentences per paragraph 5.92
Average words per sentence c. 75
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 10
Defense of Poetry, 1595.
Total paragraphs 79
Average words per paragraph 235.30
Average sentences per paragraph 6.05
Average words per sentence 38.80
rVNDALE TO TEMPLE. 83
Per cent, of single -sentence paragraphs 10
Per cent, of simple sentences ( 10
Average predications per sentence (Gerwig) \ 3.98
Per cent, of clauses saved ( 9.27
Saintsbury's criticism of Sidney as one of the first authors
of great popularity to introduce the "sentence and paragraph
heap," is entirely just as regards the Arcadia, The sentence
reaches enormous lengths and is endlessly jointed and rejointed
to do the work of the paragraph. The number of paragraphed
sentences is not high, however, — a fact noticeable in the worst
offenders in the matter of the clause-heap.
Unity is but indifferently observed in the Arcadia. Chapters
are preceded by a list of subjects of the paragraphs ; these topics,
though often felicitously put, are manifestly not matters of pre-
vision.
In turning from the Arcadia to the Defense^ we turn to an
utterly different structure. The sentence drops nearly one-half
its length. Most of the tags disappear. The new style is
incomparably better than the old.
In his recent edition ' of this work. Professor A. S. Cook
apparently regards most of the original paragraphs as lacking
unity. Of the original 79 paragraphs he breaks up 37 into
several paragraphs each. He has likewise thrown together many
others, so that the total number of paragraphs in Cook's edition
is 93. Usually these changes do improve the unity, although
sometimes, even when the logical unity is thus increased, a cer-
tain loss is felt in the distribution of emphasis.
In Sidney's edition there are 8 single-sentence paragraphs.
It is a curious fact that in Cook's edition this number is more
than doubled. That a modern editor should make 19 such
sections as against an original 8 shows clearly enough how
flexible the idea of a paragraph as a group is today, as it has
always been.
Praise may be given the general sequence of Sidney's para-
graph : there is no difficulty in following him, even when he
* Sidney's Defense of Poetry^ ed. A. S. Cook, Boston, 1890.
84 HISTORY OF THE EXGUSH PARAGRAPH.
rambles. Explicitness of reference is secured bv free use of
connectives ; in the Defepise something like 35 per cent, of his
sentences begin with conjunctions. Parallel construction of suc-
cessive periods is frequent.
WEBBE.
A Discourse of English Poetrie, 1586. Arber reprint, 1870.
Total paragraphs considered 75
(Arber, pp. 2 1-36, 52-72)
Average words per paragraph c 154
Average words per sentence c 50 50
Average sentences per paragraph 3.10
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 14
Webbe's Discourse is paragraphed in most erratic fashion.
The unity of the longer paragraphs is, strange to say, better than
that of the short ones. In his task of enumerating and charac-
terizing the English poets, Webbe abandons all paragraph
method. A glance at the sentence-length as compared with the
paragraph -length shows that Webbe marks no advance in general
structure, but rather a retrogression.
PUTTENHAM.
The Art of English Poesie, 1589, generally ascribed to
George Puttenham, is systematically written, but its paragraphing
is inorganic and without significance. The unit of composition
is the short chapter. The fourteenth chapter has but 72 words;
in like manner, many other chapters are so short as to form
isolated paragraphs and so are left unbroken. When Puttenham
does paragraph he is often moved to do so for emphasis.
SPENSER.
View of the Present State of Ireland, written c. 1596, pub-
lished 1633.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Total sentences considered 503
Average words per sentence (Sherman) 49.8
Average words per paragraph c 125.20
Average sentences per paragraph 2.51
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 48
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE, 85
Average predications per sentence { 544
Per cent, of simple sentences (Gerwig) \ 8
Per cent, of clauses saved ( 6.74
The most divergent views are held today regarding Spenser's
prose-style. One recent writer declares his prose " practically
unreadable ; " ' another calls Spenser's " an excellent prose
style ; " ^ says that " it is unaffected, clear, vigorous, straightfor-
ward ; " " that it is perfectly simple and by its very simplicity
impressive and forcible."
As is usually the case, the truth probably lies between these
extremes. Spenser is far easier to read than Hooker, whom
there have always been some people to read ; he is free from
obscurity or serious ambiguity. On the other hand, he is by no
means perfectly simple, but often very complex ; at times the
most careful attention is necessary to keep the main idea of the
sentence clearly in mind through the long series of clauses.
Spenser belongs to the line of classicists who were beginning
the experiment of extreme sentence-lengths. In this respect,
therefore, and in the comparative shortness of his paragraph,
he makes no advance. On the other hand, we are surprised
to find how few of his very long periods are really periodic.
Evidently a punctuation by strict modern standards would reduce
the sentence very greatly without hurting the syntax at all.
It surprises one to see how straightforward and close-knit is the
development of topic. The sequence is admirable. It is assisted
by a very large proportion of conjunctions and by many initial
relatives. Out of 300 sentences, 164 are connected by conjunc-
tions or conjunctive phrases. The list is as follows, the number
of connected sentences being found by deducting from the total
number (181) 17 for repetitions (due to use of double-connectives) :
Connective. Initial. Interior.
But 39
So 12 10
And 30
* Sherman, Analytics^ p. 274.
^ John W. Hales, in Craik's English Prose^ Vol. I., p. 455.
86
HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Connective.
Then
Therefore
For
Indeed
True it is
Also
Neither
Yet
Thus
Yea
Besides
Lastly, etc
Notwithstanding.
And yet
Nevertheless ....
Now
Now then
Again
Or
Thus far
Initial.
Interior.
5
II
5
3
13
• •
I
4
I
• *
9
2
I
3
2
2
I
I
2
2
2
3
I
*
3
•
3
•
5
]
I
.
From what has been said it is easy to infer that there is little
proportion in Spenser's prose. There is no skillful varying of
short sentences with long. The frequent use of illatives and of
subordinating conjunctives proper does, indeed, convey some
sense of logical prominence given to the main proposition ; but,
on the other hand, the very frequent use of initial relatives
(Spenser's besetting fault) goes far to destroy the proportion
thus obtained.
In sequence alone, then, and in the looseness of his sentence-
structure, is Spenser in the line of paragraph development.
HOOKER.
Ecclesiastical Polity, 1594-1618.
(Gerwig.)
Average predications per sentence
Per cent, of simple sentences
Per cent, of clauses saved
4.12
12
8.73
Mr. Vernon Blackburn, in the first volume of Craik's English
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE. 87
Prose, refers to Hooker as a man who " perpended every para-
graph."' I cannot possibly make out what this means. It
seems to me that of all cultivated men who ever wrote English,
Hooker perpended paragraphs the least. The early editions of
the Ecclesiastical Polity are, so far as I know, quite without
indented paragraphs. The Stansbye edition in the Astor library
(1639 ^) shows sixteen main sections in the first book, but no
sub-sections. These sections average 1875 words each. Mani-
festly a related paragraph of 45.31 sentences, the sentences being
on the average 41.23 words long, is no paragraph at all. The
paragraph- length — section-length — is a little shorter in the
second, third, and fourth books, and decidedly shorter in the
fifth — the one in which Hooker's hand is least evident. Keble,
finding himself lost in these wastes of words, broke up the whole
text in his edition of 1836; the paragraphs thus formed average
about 260 words. Can it be that Mr. Vernon Blackburn is
referring to these paragraphs when he says that Hooker per-
pended each ?
The real truth about Hooker's paragraphs is that he made
none; that, as Minto puts it, "each sentence stands on its own
bottom."^ Not that there are no short sentences; there are as
many as in Cardinal Newman.^ But the long sentences are
exceedingly periodic, complex and involved. Hooker's Polity
stands as the most deliberate attempt to abandon the paragraphic
tendencies of the vernacular and mold English prose to the syn-
tax of the Ciceronian period.
HAKLUYT.
Principal Navigations,, 1598.
Average predications per sentence i 4.22
Per cent, of simple sentences (Gerwig) -^12
Per cent, of clauses saved ( 17*54
In YL3k\\xyt'?> Principal Navigations, dr^c, of the English Nation
> P. 467.
* Manual, p. 220. Minto speaks, however, as if Hooker made paragraphs.
3 Cf. Sherman, University Studies, Vol. 1., No. 4, p. 363.
88 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
(ed. of 1599) the paragraphing is as mechanical as in Stow or
the early chroniclers. The voyages are usually reported in the
form of a ship's log, each day's record paragraphed by itself.
Again, in some parts of the book the habit of " itemizing " reduces
paragraphs on the one hand to a few words ; while in other parts
there are frequent long sections, broken only by the marginal
note.
GREENE.
The Elizabethans were perplexed as to the right way of para-
graphing conversation. Sidney relapsed into hopeless confusion
on the subject. Greene in his earlier work observes no distinct
method except now and then to make a transitional step between
the stadia that contain dialogue. But in Menaphon (1589), the
book that marks the change from Greene's exaggerated Euphu-
ism to his more truly individual manner, the author holds before
himself the rule of paragraphing each successive speech. Accord-
ingly in this book the paragraph-length is much lowered : the
average is hardly over 70 words, while in the first part oiMamil-
Ha (1583) it had been about 240, and as late as Pandosto (1588),
had approached 200. Though the paragraph-length does not
much rise in the pamphlets written after Menaphon^ neither does
it decrease. There is no steady improvement after Menaphon, in
the paragraphing of dialogue.
The reader soon learns to expect little in point of unity in
Greene's paragraphs. Each begins a new step, but too frequently
the writer fails to see when the step ends. Again, over-illustra-
tion hurts' both the unity and the proportion.
The coherence of Greene's paragraphs Js fairly good. The
movement is light and sometimes rapid, and the Euphuistic
parallelism does not retard the general progress. Proportion,
however, is wholly missing. Greene was guilty of numerous
clause-heaps, and of unnecessary single-sentence sections. The
general loose structure of his sentence does not save him from
the bane of his day — the excessive use of intermediate punctu-
ation.
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE, 89
NASH.
Nash is in nearly every point a better paragrapher than
Greene — faint as this praise may be. The proportion of wholly
amorphous paragraphs is small in the History of Jack Wilton.
Nash's pamphlets are arranged with something like real orderli-
ness. The units are tolerably long in most of his work : from
about 260 words in the Anatomy of Absurdity the paragraph
descends in the introduction to Greene's Menaphon to about 250,
falls still nearer the 200 mark in Pierce Peniless, and reaches its
lowest point, say 160 words, in Have With You to Saffron Walden.
There are more short sentences than in Greene, and the transition
between them is more accurate.
LODGE.
Lodge's sentences are short, and the sequence between them is
good. But the writer is utterly without paragraph-method.
There is no unity in the sections of the Defense of Poetry, Music *
and Stage Plays. Those of the Alarum against Usurers are short
and often false. The Historie of Forbonius and Prisceria has one
only merit — it paragraphs long speeches by themselves, placing
between each a short transitional paragraph. In Rosalynde the
story runs wild — freshest and brightest of narratives running on
heedless of whither away. Dialogue makes no difference. Para-
graphs come only when the pen gives out.
RALEGH.
In the 1666 edition of -the History, the mark §, in its early
type form, divides chapters into long sections, called by Ralegh
paragraphs. Each of these is subdivided by indentation. But
curiously enough, Ralegh often subdivides a paragraph into what
he calls sections, indicating each by reference marks, as |j or f .
Thus he leaves no name for the indented paragraph, and exactly
reverses the modern meaning of the words paragraph and section.
Ralegh makes amazing show of systematic arrangement ; but
the analysis is often arbitrary and inexact. On the one hand
90 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
this poor analysis, on the other his utterly unwieldy and elephan-
tine periods, make him an exceedingly bad paragraph ist.
THE AUTHORIZED VERSION.
No English version of the Bible was broken into "verses'*
until 1 551, when Robert Stephens of Paris printed an edition
with paragraphs similar to Tyndale's (already mentioned), and
marginal figures indicating sub-sections of the paragraphs. The
Geneva Bible^ c. 1560, was the first to indent these sub-sections.
The Authorized, 161 1, followed the Geneva in this respect. The
main sections in the chapters were indicated by the mark ^,
which, oddly enough, does not occur after the twentieth chapter
of Acts. This last named fact prevents me from giving exact
averages for the length of these paragraphs, for while the whole
number of words in both Testaments has long ago been counted
by patient hands, I have not been able to get the statistics of the
text minus the unparagraphed portion ; and it goes without
saying that there is nothing to gain by making a count. The
paragraphs of the New Testament average, I should say, not far
from 560 words, 7 verses, each. There is nothing necessary in
these divisions, and they have been departed from by other edi-
tions, such as the Cambridge Paragraph Bible of Dr. Scrivener,
and by the Revised Version.
BACON.
The Advancement of Learning, 1605.
Total paragraphs considered no
Average words per paragraph 204.67 (Ed. of 1633.)
Average words per sentence 60.03 (Ed. of Aldis Wright.)
Average sentences per paragraph 3.41
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 32 (Ed. of 1633.)
Essays.
Average words per sentence (Sherman) 28+
Average predications per sentence C 3.12
Per cent, of simple sentences (Gerwig) -(19
Per cent, of clauses saved ( 2.87
It is an immense pleasure to emerge from the mistiness of
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE, 91
early Elizabethan prose into the lutnefi siccum of the Advancement.
Although it is evident that the sentences are latinized and
excessively long, yet there is a very remarkable skill evident in
the grouping of them. Whether consciously or not, Bacon
employed all the power of a great rhetorician to reconcile the
period and the paragraph. The intellectual style of the Advance-
ment was favorable to the experiment ; there was no need of short
sentences appealing to the will or to the picturesque imagination ;
the experiment succeeded as far as it could ever succeed.
The paragraphs are not too short ; they are methodical and
orderly ; the sequence is secured by explicit reference in the
shape of demonstratives and conjunctions, and above all by the
logic of a great dialectician. Not a paragraph lacks unity. But
with it all we. are conscious that the transitions are painfully
formal and mechanical ; and that there is a lack of variety in
structure not compensated for by brilliant rhetoric. There is no
living web of discourse. The period and the paragraph have
come into conflict as units, and their antagonism has for the
nonce been frozen by logic into stony civility. There is a stiff
monotony in Bacon's way of opening a paragraph with, " Now as
to the first point," and closing it with, "Thus much for the first
point."
When we turn to the Essays, we find the spell broken and
the period driven off the field. The average sentence has 28
words ; a sentence epigrammatic, of course, made of mere glints
and gleams of truth, but still capable of arrangement in the
paragraph. The author is not, however, aiming at sequence, or
even at lucidity. The changes are abrupt. Bacon felt this, and,
to show the relatively isolated nature of many of the paragraphs,
placed the old ^ before each when the lack of coherence
between paragraphs was particularly noticeable.
THE CHARACTER-WRITERS. JONSON.
In our speaking of the history of the isolated paragraph, the
character- writers. Hall, Earle, Overbury, Breton, etc., must not
be left out of account. In some of them, particularly Breton,
9^ UIS^TOkY Of THE E.WrLISIi FARAG?:AFH.
UtVich riitthfid is 2&an:fes:£d :n :hese short parazr^phs tha: char-
SLCZtnzt var.fyih vonlAt^ and 'inworthics. Breton's habit is to
\j^z}u ear,h character in the san^e way as t\trf other, with a bold
?sentence yizir.i/:T*z --p the ::*ain \-ice or virtue of the subject.
This topic i* then emphasized in several short sentences, bv no
means neces^arilv in lo^rical proirression. In all these writers the
sentence is short, and affects the apothegmatic. Theophrastian
tone. The sequence is according^ly such as might be exp)ected
between apothegms. In some of the writers Euphuistic parallel-
ism is prominent. This is especially true of Overbur}' ; but Over-
bury's general structure is stiff and sometimes incoherent. I do
not take it that the early journalistic isolated paragraph owed
much to these writers, though the satiric paragraph of Pope's dav
was not without its resemblance to these earlier, but less per-
sonal |>asquinades.
In speaking of the isolated paragraph we must rank Ben
Jonson as a really important author, though one whose influence
on contemporary prose was small. Many of the detached frag-
ments of the Timber are complete whole compositions in minia-
ture. The sentence is short, and its structure is surprisingly
simple and direct. The paragraph coherence is nearly always
admirable, notwithstanding Jonson's tendency toward epigram.
LORD BROOKE.
Life of Sir Philip Sidney, 1652. (Brooke died, 1628.)
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average words per paragraph c. 150
Average sentences per paragraph c. 2.7
Average words per sentence c. 55.53
Average words per paragraph in first 35 paragraphs. 158.66
Average words per sentence in first 35 paragraphs. . 55-53
I'er cent, of single-sentence paragraphs in 200 para-
graphs 35
Fulke Greville, Lord Brooke, is one of the worst offenders in
the matter of inorganic single-sentence paragraphs. His actual
percentage of such is not so high as that of certain other authors,
but Brooke's paragraphed sentence is a heap of clauses extremely
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE, 93
awkward and involved. In the matter of unity Brooke is better
than Sidney, and worse, though less formal, than Bacon. Really
false paragraphs are rare, but transitional sentences properly
introductory of a new section are often given in the preceding.
All in all, Brooke's style, like Bacon's, is an illustration of the
futility of any compromise between the paragraph and the long
period as units of discourse.
BURTON.
Anatomy of Melancholy^ 162 1.
Total paragraphs considered 100
Total words considered 38,057
Total sentences considered 948
Average words per paragraph 380.57
Average sentences per paragraph 9.48
Average words per sentence 40.14
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 18
If excessive variability in stylistic averages goes to show men-
tal irregularity, then Burton's paragraph-length would prove him
mad. The word-length of the Anatomy varies from 39 to 2529.
Evidently there is little system here. When quotations press for-
ward to Burton's pen, paragraph-method is a dead letter. On
the other hand, when he is framing at leisure a section of orig-
inal discourse, there is visible a stylistic spirit really new.
Burton's sentence average is not greater than Swift's, and as Bur-
ton's long sentences are exceedingly long, it is plain that he
uses counterbalancing short propositions to an extent elsewhere
unknown among scholars of his day. It is indeed not far from
the truth to say, with Mr. Saintsbury,' in his latest utterance,
that the arrangement of Burton's sentences is often "distinctly
terse and crisp."
In his long sentences Burton takes minute pains to subor-
dinate, by conjunctions and demonstratives, the lesser clauses:
often, however, with poor success. But the number of initial
connectives is moderate. Out of 300 sentences, 64 begin
with conjunctives, and there are 15 interior sentence-connectives :
^Craik's English Prose ^ Vol. II., p. 117.
94
HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
in Ascham there were i68 sentence-connectives in 300 sentences.
The list in Burton is given below. To get the number of con-
nected sentences 15 is to be deducted from a total 79, for repeti-
tions.
Connective. Initial. Interior.
And 19
Besides 4
But 13
For 6
First
However 2
In a word I
In conclusion i
In like sort
Nay I
On the other
Otherwise i
Or 3
Thus 2 2
So 7
Then . . i
Therefore . . 7
Yea I
Yet 3 I
We may say, therefore, that while Burton's paragraph-struc-
ture is variable in merit, and while he is guilty of many amor-
phous clause-heaps, he marks an advance toward one secret of
proportion (the short sentence), and toward the modern method
of sentence-connection.
MILTON.
AreopagiticUy 1644.
Total paragraphs considered 33
Total words considered I7»948
Total sentences considered
Average words per paragraph
Average sentences per paragraph :
Average words per sentence
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs
Average predications per sentence
Per cent, of simple sentences (Gerwig)
Per cent, of clauses saved
TV N DALE TO TEMPLE. 95
Milton ridiculed the short sentence and despised the loose
order. His own sentence is highly periodic and involved : he
stands with Hooker and Clarendon at the extreme of the clas-
sical movement. Some of his prose works, as the Defense of the
People of England^ are practically without paragraphs. Others, as
\ht Eikonoklastes, have a mechanical paragraph — used for formal
enumeration of points in an argument. Such paragraphs are
likely to be of one sentence, and amorphous. The Areopagitica
is the best paragraphed of all the works, though not so freely
paragraphed as the Reformation in England; yet few even of the
sections of the Areopagitica are really units.
It must be noted, however, that Milton is distinctly subject
to one tradition, that of paragraphing for emphasis. Thus, in
the Eikonoklastes (ed. of 1649, P* 200) there is one sentence that
is broken into twelve paragraphs. These mark the various
"articles" that state the conditions on which the king, Milton
asserts, is ready to capitulate with God.
CLARENDON.
History of the Great Rebellion, ^M\A\^\iQd 1 704-1 707. (Clar-
endon died, 1674.)
Total paragraphs considered 100
Total words considered 21,732
Total sentences considered 290
Average words per paragraph 217.32
Average sentences per paragraph 2.90
Average words per sentence 74-94
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 28
In Clarendon the classical experiment is wrecked. Other
men had written long sentences — Spenser, for instance. But
Spenser's clauses follow each other like cars in a railroad train ;
each could be uncoupled and sent singly on its way. Claren-
don's long sentence may be likened to the same train "tele-
scoped ; " where framework and ornament, ribs of wood and rods
of iron, are jammed together and inextricably twisted out of all
resemblance to any orderly thing.
Clarendon, however, did not, like Milton, utterly disregard
96 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
the paragraph. He repeated the rash compromise of Bacon and
Brooke, and failed signally. After his day the experiment was
never fully repeated. Clarendon's paragraph-length is 217
words, his sentence 74 ; manifestly a paragraph of this length
could not coexist with a formless sentence of 74 words.
JEREMY TAYLOR.
The Liberty of Prophesying, 1647.
i Total paragraphs considered 109
Total words considered 54,787
Total sentences considered 1035
Average words per paragraph 502.63
Average words per sentence 52.93
Average sentences per paragraph 9.49
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 6
It was good service that Coleridge rendered the fame of
Taylor by showing the great bishop to be not half so unintelli-
gible as some rhetoricians had held. But Coleridge, who
admired Milton's prose almost as extravagantly as Landor did,
would have it that Milton is clear enough ; he fails to show how
much more lucid Taylor is than Milton.
Taylor's sentence is less periodic than Milton's and far less
involved than Clarendon's. But his sentences are long and
there is the wildest abuse of conjunctions. Often the orator
himself sees that the sentence is inadequate to his unit of
thought, and leaves the period in hopelessly incomplete syntac-
tical shape. Taylor's chosen unit is the period, but he does not
try to reconcile it with the paragraph, and is himself conscious
that he is in confusion on the whole question of structure.
SIR THOMAS BROWNE.
Religio Medici, 1643.
Average words per paragraph c. 340
Average sentences per paragraph 10+
Hydriotaphia, 1658.
Total paragraphs considered 107
Average words per paragraph 125.08
Average sentences per paragraph 3.78
Average words per sentence 33-09
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE, 97
The paragraphs in both the Religio and the Hydriotaphia are
numbered as "sections." The Religio has a comparatively diffuse
flow, natural in an autobiographical work first written for the eyes
of friends only. The Hydriotaphia^ written nearly a quarter of a cen-
tury later, shows more of curious care, and the condensed language
of a maturer mind. The change in the style is accompanied by a
shortening of the paragraph from about 340 words to 125.
Browne is often assailed as a Latinizer, and in one sense
the criticism is true of his syntax as it is of his vocabulary.
Browne used every Latin construction to which English would
lend itself; but he knew the limits, as Milton and Taylor and
Hooker did not. He almost never spun a web of involutions.
He knew when both sense and rhythm required a full stop.
>
Consequently his sentence is not long, not so long even as
De Quincey's ; it may be added that there are in it far fewer
unnecessary connectives than in De Quincey's.
The sections of the Hydriotaphia have better unity than can be
found in Elizabethan prose outside of Bacon. The sequence and
coherence are not relatively so good. Yet it may be questioned
whether any other writer so aphoristic has so well succeeded in
keeping logical articulation between sentences. Each group of
Browne's strange gems has a general hue and harmony of its own.
In point, then, of unity, of sentence-length, and of logical
rather than formal articulation between sentences, Browne marks
an immense advance over the men with whom Coleridge classed
him as a corrupter of English. In one other respect he marks
advance ; namely, in the rhythm of successive clauses, and, to
a less extent, of successive sentences. Milton had a dawning
sense of the necessity of an occasional short sentence as a rhyth-
mical relief from the roll of the- period. Browne carried
this principle of variety still farther, uniting with it a sense of
tone- color that has never been surpassed.
HOBBES.
Leviathan^ 1651.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average words per paragraph c. 1 16.40
98 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Average sentences per paragraph c. 2.96
Average words per sentence c. 39.26
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 35
Hobbes marks no improvement in the matter of sentence-
length as related to the paragraph. His sentence, indeed, is only
39, but his paragraph is not large enough to hold a unit of this
size. It must nevertheless be admitted that the sense of unity in
Hobbes*s sentence is highly developed for the time, and that the
paragraphs are usually units, though not always properly amplified.
But the chief virtue of these paragraphs is their precision of artic-
ulation, both internal and external. The coherence is eminently
good, though the massing is so poor and the formal predications
so awkwardly numerous that the reader's progress is but slow.
LORD HERBERT.
Autobiography, written c. 1643.
Total paragraphs considered 40
Total words considered 9983
Total sentences considered 132
Average words per paragraph 249-f-
Average sentences per paragraph 3.30
Average words per sentence 75.6o
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 25
Lord Herbert's Autobiography was not published till 1764,
when Walpole edited and printed it. How closely the paragraph-
ing follows the MS. I do not know.
Mr. Saintsbury has said of Lord Herbert, "The writer dis-
plays an art, very uncommon in his time, in the alternation of
short and long sentences, and the general adjustment of the
paragraph.' Mr. Saintsbury is usually not far from the truth in
his comments on prose structure, but surely in the present
case he has overestimated Lord Herbert's paragraphic tend-
dency. Out of the first 132 sentences in the Autobiography
only seven fall below 20 words, and the average is 75 words,
a length reached but once in the worst days of the paragraph,
hitherto. These figures are enough to limit seriously the force
^History of Elizabethan Literature^ p. 439.
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE. 99
of Mr. Saintsbury's dictum. It may, however, be granted that
this dictum is not without some foundation ; for Lord Herbert
has a knack of making a paragraph of two or three sentences,
the first very long, the second moderately short. There is an
exceptional example of this in the sixth paragraph ; here the first
of the two periods has 329 words, the second but 27. In the
thirty-sixth paragraph there is another exceptional example,
where the introductory sentence has 20 words, the second and
only other has 552. Here therefore we find a nascent sense of
paragraph rhythm, and this is really Lord Herbert's contribution
to the development. In other respects he marks no advance ;
his monotonously ponderous periods and enormous 'para-
graphed sentences belong to the conflict between period and
paragraph.
WALTON.
Life of Hooker, 1665.
Total paragraphs considered 106
Total words considered 19,842
Average words per paragraph 187.19
Average sentences per paragraph 2.9
Average words per sentence 64
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 25
Complete Angler^ 1653.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average sentences per paragraph 1.5
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 73 (dialogue)
In Spite of his colloquial tone, garrulous Isaac Walton belongs
only too evidently to the older prose. He is not one of the
Latinists, but his sentences are very long and guileless of unity.
His numerous single-sentence paragraphs are nearly all clause-
heaps, except in the Angler, when conversation controls them.
Walton's style is childlike in its abuse of coordinating con-
junctions ; it belongs in this respect almost as far back as Mande-
ville ; 80 sentences out of 300 begin with and. The list of sen-
tence-connectives from the Angler is as follows : The number
of sentences connected (out of 300) is 130, or 16 less than the
whole number of sentence-connectives.
•V.-;
100 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
Connective. Initial. Interior.
And 80
But 25
Nay 5
Thus 2
First 3 8
Also . . 6
Well _ 5
Hence _ i
However . . i
Therefore . . 2
Then i 2
On the contrary i i
Indeed i
So . . I
Now I
In the matter of unity, Walton's paragraphs are hardly
defensible. Mr. Lowell's remark on Walton's poetic style, that
he has " a habit of leaving the direct track of narrative on the
suggestion of the first inviting by-path,"' is equally true of Walton
in his prose.
* ' FULLER.
*.• .Worthies of England^ 1662.
• ^.''Total paragraphs considered 100
Total words considered 8677
Total sentences considered 370
Average words per paragraph 86.77
Average sentences per paragraph 3.70
Average words per sentence 23.45
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 20
Fuller's paragraphs are light and short, but mechanical rather
than literary. He advances with regularity and order, complet-
ing each step with a satisfied air of precision. But not half the
paragraphs are built of fully developed sentences ; verbs are
omitted with the utmost nonchalance, and the section often
degenerates into a mere list of particulars. Fuller's sentence is
short and pointed, though he exhibits no great skill in its adjust-
ment in the paragraph.
'Lowell, Latest Literary Essays, Boston, 1892.
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE, lOl
Fuller is not free from digressions, but, as Minto observes,
he is always conscious of his digression, and takes care to return
explicitly to the original topic. By far the larger number of
sections state the topic first. Fuller's regularity in the use of the
deductive order makes him the precursor of Johnson and
Macaulay.
On the whole, Fuller is distinctly in the new line of paragraph
development. In sentence-length and in general method he is
the most modern man of his time.
SELDEN.
Table Talk, 1689. (Selden died, 1654.)
Total paragraphs considered 81
Average words per paragraph 72 . 97
Average sentences per paragraph 2.17
Average words per sentence 33-58
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 43
Selden 's Table Talk was published thirty-five years after the
author's Heath. The arrangement of the dicta was made by
Selden's amanuensis, Milward. Milward usually groups under
one heading several related remarks, something in the style of
Bacon's Essays, All Selden's paragraphs are indeed relatively
isolated. They are not often organic wholes, but are mentioned
here as being in the line of general sentential development, the
sentence being 33 words.
HOWELL.
Mr. Joseph Jacobs, in his recent edition of James Howell's
Familiar Letters, regards Howell, rather than Dryden, as the
father of the short sentence. It may be admitted that Howell
had a knack, more pronounced than that of Lord Herbert, of
occasionally alternating an exceedingly long sentence with a short
one. But as for Howell's being the father of the short sentence
it is enough to say that in the original edition of the pamphlet,
England's Tears for the Present Wars, the sentence average is
actually 77 words, one of the very highest in the history of our
prose. Nor yet had Howell advanced otherwise to the modern
I02 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
conception of the paragraph. He had no proper sense of unity
or proportion.
COWLEY.
Essays, from sixth edition, 1680.
Cromwell hdiS 14 paragraphs, 12,574 words.
Proposition for the Advancement of Experimental Philosophy
has 51 paragraphs, 5132 words.
Average words per paragraph — Cromwell 898.14
Average words per paragraph — Philosophy 100.62
Average words per sentence (two essays) c. 48.37
Average words per sentence — Cromwell c. 38.01
Average words per sentence — Philosophy c. 54.43
Cowley's prose is transitional ; his early sentence is long and
unmethodical ; his later much shorter and more homogeneous.
The sections in the earlier editions (for the paragraphing in
the later ones, even Grosart's, cannot be trusted) are very irreg-
ular and inorganic. Cowley is not actually disorderly, but he
has no proper sense of paragraph method. He will in one
chapter paragraph a single sentence for emphasis (e, g. Essay on
Liberty, ed. of 1680, p. 82 ; Essay on Solitude, p. 92) ; in the
next chapter he will allow a paragraph to run on for six pages.
Cowley is in the line of advance, but distinctly so in one par-
ticular only. He spares initial connectives and depends for
sequence on logical succession. Of the 57 sentences (Lumby's
ed.) in the Essay on Greatness, not one begins with and, only two
begin with but, and only seven with subordinating connectives,
including relative adverbs.
BUNYAN.
The Pilgrim's Progress, 1 6 7 8- 1 684.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Total words considered 12,520
Average words per paragraph 62.60
Average sentences per paragraph 1.98
Average words per sentence 3161
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 61
Average predications per sentence ( 3.91
Per cent, of simple sentences (Gerwig) \ 10
Per cent, of clauses saved ( 5.92
TYNDALE TO TEMPLE, 103
The dialogue form of the Pilgrim's Progress of course deter-
mines in a large measure the length of the paragraph in this
work. We have in Grace Abounding an example of Bunyan's
sustained prose ; but the paragraph of Grace Abounding 1 have not
been able fo examine in any early edition.
We find at last in the PilgrinCs Progress a sentence which
belongs to the essential paragraph structure. Bunyan has mastered
the short sentence. He can vary it with longer ones — not very
periodic ones — and produce effects of severe variety and of sober
rhythm. The most important outcome of the age that ends with
Bunyan is this short sentence. The vernacular stream that has
found its way through the obstacles of the age emerges bright and
strong in Bunyan. When the next period of development sets
in the writers gradually bring this short sentence into the serv-
ice of the longer thought-integer, and so the new unit of style
is evolved.
CHAPTER VII.
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCEY.
TEMPLE.
Heroic Virtue^ 1692.
Total paragraphs considered 184.
Total words considered 28,775.
Total sentences considered 538.
Average words per paragraph 1 56.30
Average sentences per paragraph 2.90
Average words per sentence 53-40
Advancement of Trade in Ireland, 1692.
Total paragraphs considered 40
Average words per paragraph 226 +
Average words per sentence 54 +
It is probably useless to dispute whether, as Mr. Saintsbury
says, Temple was a follower of Dryden, or whether, as Mr. C. D.
Yonge thinks, Dryden imitated Sir William. Both men were
probably indebted to Jonson, Cowley, and even Bunyan, though
from Sir William's sentence-length one would hardly think so.
What is certain for our purposes is that Temple's first important
work, the Observations on the Netherlands (1672), is far more care-
fully paragraphed than the Essay of Dramatic Poesy (1667) ; and
again that in ordering of matter Dryden's best work cannot
compare with Temple's best.
Temple's sentence is indeed too long ; it is longer than Dry-
den's and more than twice as long as Fuller's. But the clauses
follow the simple oral form, and for the first time in our prose
we have a balance and a cadence that are not manifestly artificial.
This unobtrusive balance and the parallel construction of sen-
tences are an immense help structurally to the coherence of the
paragraph. Of course the balance will now and then degenerate
into an artificial pointedness that, by tending toward epigram, hurts
ro4
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCEY, 105
the sequence. But the predominating effect is that of close-knit
prose. Another virtue, most important historically, marks Sir
William's sentences. Though long, they rarely lack unity.
Temple's coherence depends very largely on structure. Of
300 sentences in the Heroic Virtue ovA"^ 51 are joined by con-
junctions. The list follows ; it will be seen that double con-
nectives are not used, for the whole number of connectives is the
same, within one, as the whole number of connected sentences.
It is perhaps true that the brevity of the list shows French
influence.
Connective. Initial. Interior.
And 13
Besides i i
But 12
Also . . I
For 6
In short i
It is true i
Likewise . . 2
Finally . . i
Nor I
On the other side 2
So 3
Therefore . . i
Thus 3
Yet 2
Sir William's contribution may be described as an increase of.
coherence by structure ; and of skill in transition between para-
graphs.
DRYDEN.
Translation ^ 1685. Satire, 1693. Parallel between Poetry and
Painting, 1695.
Average words per paragraph in Essay on Satire. . . 256 -f-
Average words per paragraph in Translation -\- Par-
allel between Poetry and Painting 261 -|-
Whole number words in Satire -\- Translation -\-
Parallel 49>969
Whole number sentences in Satire -f- Translation -f-
Parallel 1300
lo6 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
Whole number paragraphs in Satire + Translation
+ ParaUd l8o
Average words per paragraph in Satire + Transla-
tion + Parallel 277.55
Average sentences per paragraph in Satire + Trans-
lation + Parallel 7.22
Average words per sentence in Satire + Translation
+ Parallel 38.44
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs in Satire +
Translation -\- Parallel Ii +
Dramatic Poesy ^ 1667.
(Gerwig, for 521 periods.)
Average predications per sentence 4.89
Per cent, of simple sentences 6
Per cent, of clauses saved 4.88
The fame of Dryden as our first great prosaist is not enduring
without challenge. Mr. Saintsbury' and Mr. Gosse' credit Dry-
den with full mastery of English-prose ; on the other hand Mr.
Minto^ referred to his genius as the reverse of methodical, and
Mr. Sherman* calls him almost as formless as Spenser.
It is true that Dryden brought to the writing of prose a vigor
unknown before ; that he exhibited a rich vocabulary of simple
speech, and a general felicity of diction ; that he was not equaled
in his day in power of varying the structure of the sentence
and giving it flexibility and balance. On the other hand, it is
not quite the whole truth to say with Saintsbury that his slovenli-
ness in sentence-structure is only occasional. Dryden was singu-
larly uneven in his sentence-writing, and it is safe to say that no
single piece of his prose is free from impossible periods.
With every deduction Dryden nevertheless remains the most
potent individuality in modifying the sentence to reasonable pro-
portions. He stands as a dividing line between the old sentence
and the new. But as a paragraphist he is inferior to Temple.
His genius is a vagrant one, and he sins incessantly against the
^Specimens of English Prose ^ p. xxii.
^History of Eighteenth Century Literature, P* 9i«
"^Manual, p. 334.
^Analytics, p. 292.
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCEY, 107
cardinal law of unity. There are indeed plenty of good para-
graphs in Dryden, but the good ones are nearly always short.
It is a curious fact that in spite of lack of logical severity in
the analysis of the whole composition, and in spite of the very
great fluctuation in his paragraph-lengths, Dryden had some sense
of rhythmical proportion in distributing his matter by paragraphs.
The word-length of the paragraph in Satire^ is the same within
five words, as in the combined essays. Translation + Parallel.
Dryden had indeed,' as everyone kaows, a distinct feeling for
"the other harmony of prose." This rhythmical sense gives us,
along with the cadence of the sentence, a feeling for parallel
construction. To this his paragraphs often owe a coherence that
goes far to make up for his digressiveness. He depends for coher-
ence largely on the order of words, and this regard for order of
words helps to make him the most forcible of the early prosaists.
He does not rely on initial sentence-connectives. Out of three
hundred sentences, only twelve begin with ^//^, eighteen with but ;
while subordinatives are still more sparingly employed.
His sentences * improve as his style matures ; few authors
show so much change. The improvement is not so marked in
the matter of paragraph unity ; the sound thinking of later
life does not seem much to check his fits of irrelevance.
LOCKE.
Essay on Human Understandings 1690.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Whole number words 40»545
Whole number sentences 814
Average words per sentence 49.8
Average words per paragraph 202.7
Average sentences per paragraph 4.07
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 18 +
It must be admitted, even by those who think that Locke
crossed the line where writing ceases to be Jiterature, that he
' I choose late essays as exhibiting Dryden's matured style.
' Sherman puts Dryden's sentence at 45-+- ; it seems to me this must be an
average from the early prefaces.
io8 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
is the most orderly writer of his day, though his method is
purely formal. The early editions of his works are very carefully
analyzed by chapters and sections, the latter being marked §.
The section usually coincides with the paragraph, but not always.
Many editions have marginal summaries of sections, and tabular
summaries in the table of contents.
In general the paragraphs have good unity. The paragraph
is short relatively to the sentence, but Locke does not, like
Hobbes, paragraph tiny stadia for emphasis. His failure to
reach the rhetorical paragraph lies largely in the fact that his
paragraph lacks proportion. He dwells on the unimportant at
the expense of the important. Half his introductions are too
long. Nor is his coherence so good as might be expected in
a writer who has so much to say about the value of consecutive-
ness in thought. He often brings illustrations from a distance
and introduces tliem abruptly.
DEFOE.
Essay on Projec y (1697), omitting numerical accounts.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Whole number words 16,978
Whole number sentences 342
Average words per sentence 49-64
Average words per paragraph 84.89
Average sentences per paragraph i .7 1
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 62
Robinson Crusoe (17 19), 200 paragraphs.
Total words 28,327
Total sentences 360
Average words per sentence 78.68
Average words per paragraph 141.63
Average sentences per paragraph 1.87
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 60
If Locke is, in certain formal respects, the best paragrapher
of his day, Defoe is in all respects the worst. He really knows
no difference between the sentence and the paragraph ; he para-
graphs for emphasis only. The sentence of Robinson Crusoe is
nearly as long as the paragraph of the Essay on Projects, It
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCEY. 109
would be hard to find another writer of such irregularities in
sentence-length.
Defoe's coherence in narrative is good, for his pictorial
imagination is exceedingly vivid, and his diction and method
that of swift, lucid conversation. But in argument all this is
changed. Here he neglects every device of transition and pours
out his ideas in the most haphazard way. In argument he is vigor-
ous enough, but his vigor is wasted by utter disregard of method.
SWIFT.
The Battle of the Books, 1704 (written 1698).
Total paragraphs 31
Total words 9234
Total sentences 232
Average words per sentence 39.80
Average words per paragraph 297.86
Average sentences per paragraph 7.48
The Tale of a Tub, 1704 (written 1698).
Total paragraphs considered 100
Total words considered 18,577
Total sentences considered 456
Average words per sentence 40.74
Average words per paragraph 185.77
Average sentences per paragraph 4.56
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 15
Average predications per sentence (Gerwig, ) 3.69
Per cent, of simple sentences for 500 v 13
Per cent, of clauses saved periods.) \ 9.23
Travels of Lemuel Gulliver, \^2(i.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Total words considered 46,844
Total sentences considered 1171
Average words per sentence 40.00
Average words per paragraph 234.22
Average sentences per paragraph 5.85
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 15
The unity of Swift's paragraphs is usually all that could
be desired. Now and then, however, a paragraph will be so long
as to obliterate, apparently, any sign of topic. These rare para-
1 10 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
graphs are almost inexplicable when compared with his usual
sections. Professor Cesare Lombroso would, I fear, find the
eccentricity of madness in them, as he did in the inversions
of the Dean's conversation.
Swift's command of proportion by paragraph-punctuation is
small. It is noticeable that the proportion of very short sen-
tences (sentences under 15 words) is not large — 6.3 per cent, in
the Tale of a Tub, 6.4 per cent, in Gulliver. The average of the
sentence is constant, in works separated even by 28 years : the
three books mentioned show a variation of less than a whole
word in sentence average, though the paragraph-averages of dif-
ferent books differ enormously.
The superb coherence and emphasis of Swift's style are due
largely to the straightforward, logical order of the thought, and
the skillful placing of important words at the end of a sentence
or paragraph. Swift is the first author to show in the paragraph
much of what Wendell calls Mass. His sentences often fall at
the close like taps of a steam-hammer, and sometimes the taps
seem concentrated in one great blow at the end of the paragraph.
Connectives he uses less than does any of his predecessors.
The list from Gulliver is as follows — showing only 39 formally
connected sentences out of a total of 300.
Connective. Initial. Interior.
But 14
Therefore . . 2
Likewise . . 4
However 6 i
Whereupon 2
Besides i
Also . . I
Thus . . I
So . . I
Now 3
For 2
Indeed . . i
ADDISON.
The Freeholder, 1715-1716.
Total paragraphs considered 200
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y. 1 1 1
Total words considered 34»65i
Total sentences considered 898
Average words per paragraph 173.25
Average sentences per paragraph 4.49
Average words per sentence 38.58
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 14
Spectator.
(Gerwig, for 500 periods.)
Average predications per sentence 3.67
Per cent, of simple sentences 12
Per cent, of clauses saved • 3.72
Addison's unity is usually faultless. His coherence depends
largely upon word-order and sentence-structure ; of 300 sentences
only 13 begin with and, 16 with but. His massing, when com-
pared with Swift's, is defective. In brief, the paragraph structure
is easy and flowing, correct in unity, defective in emphasis.
Addison's favorite paragraph is loose, with one or two
introductory sentences. Deductive specimens are not infre-
quent. The topic is often developed by repetition from changing
points of view, — what Scott and Denney have termed the alter-
nating method. The method is frequently overdone.
Addison had little sense of the value of the short sentence,
either as a means of emphasis, or as a way of varying paragraph
rhythm. His rhythm remained a somewhat monotonous sen-
tence-rhythm. Less than 4 per cent, of his sentences fall below
15 words. There is no wide variation in the number of sentences
to the paragraph : thus, 44 out of 200 paragraphs have three sen-
tences each.
SHAFTESBURY.
Characteristics, 171 1.
Total paragraphs considered 100
Total words considered I5»490
Total sentences considered 578
Average words per paragraph 154.90
Average sentences per paragraph 5.78
Average words per sentence 26.80
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 3
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length 44-34 1
1 1 2 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words 26
Per cent, of simple sentences (Gerwig, ) 28
Average predications per sentence for 650 \ 2.61
Per cent, of clauses saved periods.) ) 4.02
Had he chosen, Addison might have learned much from the
well-bred style of his contemporary, Anthony Ashley Cooper;
and particularly he might have learned variety. Shaftesbury used
the short sentence without stint, and often with fine effect. His
percentage of sentences falling under the length of 15 words
is the highest before Burke. His sentence is more variable
than that of any author of his own time ; and he much sur-
passes in this even Bolingbroke. It is to be admitted, never-
theless, that Shaftesbury was not fully master of the short sen-
tence. Many of his sentences are so brief that they utterly lack
unity.
In several other paragraphic virtues Shaftesbury is correct,
though never firmly and surely so. His unity is good, the para-
graph being very short. He follows the loose order definitely
enough to give his topic in the course of the first two sentences.
He is coherent, making one sentence follow, without need of
connective, from the preceding.
He has his faults, however. His massing is such as to obscure
the emphatic words. Though his sentences do not need connec-
tives, there is an abuse of initial coordinatives. His list of initial
connectives is as follows, showing 79 initially connected sentences
out of 300 ; the list would not be much increased if the interior
sentence-connectives were added :
For
20
However i
But
26
21
2
Thus I
And
Yet
Now I
Nor I
Nor
2
Or I
So that
2
On the other side i
All in all Shaftesbury may be regarded as contributing the ele
ment of variety in sentence-length. His paragraph-length is not
so variable.
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y. 1 13
BOLINGBROKE.
Letter to Sir William Wyndham, 1753.
Total paragraphs considered 173
Total words considered 34»I99
Total sentences considered 981
Average words per paragraph 197.68
Average sentences per paragraph 5.67
Average words per sentence 34.86
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 5
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words 13
Study of History.
(Gerwig, for 977 periods.)
Average predications per sentence 3.65
Per cent, of simple sentences 14
Per cent, of clauses saved 3.72
It may freely be granted that Bolingbroke's style is in some
respects vicious; that, as Mr. Gosse says, it is "grandiloquent,
and yet ineffectual." ' These faults affect unfavorably the empha-
sis of his paragraph ; and yet, after every deduction, Bolingbroke
is distinctly a modern paragrapher.
He knows the value of the short sentence, though he does
not use it freely enough. Only 13 per cent, of his sentences fall
below the length of 15 words ; yet he alternates long propositions
and short ones, with telling effect.
The unity of his paragraphs is generally unassailable. He
looks to the transition between sentences, and, what was then
more rare, to the transition between paragraphs. He balances
sentences, sometimes to windy lengths, but does not let the coher-
ence seriously suffer. He carefully eschews connectives, indeed
rather too carefully.
Above all he depends more on the paragraph than do his pred-
ecessors. He is always making sentences that are unintelligible
except in the light of the larger unit. He delights, as Macaulay
does, in a preliminary generalization so sweeping and so indefinite
as to require a multitude of subsequent propositions to unravel
^History of Eighteenth Century Literature^ p. 174.
1 14 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
the puzzle. He has deliberately adopted the paragraph unit,
and it is evident that from the study of him some of the best
English paragraphists, notably Burke and Macaulay, have their
cue, slight as that cue is.
RICHARDSON AND FIELDING.
We saw that the Elizabethans developed no fixed method of
paragraphing dialogue, though Greene and Nash tend irregularly
toward the modern method of setting off each speech. In
eighteenth-century novels the question is still in dispute, though
not in utter confusion.
Richardson in general paragraphs each speech. He does not
use quotation marks. Rarely he gives the dialogue in dramatic
form, prefacing each speech merely with the speaker's name.
Some of the paragraphs are exceedingly short, even when they
form part of a monologue. Though it is asserted that Richard-
son did not read French, it is hard to believe that he was not
influenced by French models in paragraphing. Else how could
he, a practical printer, bring himself, say, to a series of 13 para-
graphs, averaging 28.38 words (as in Clarissa^ Vol. 2, Letter
xxiii.) ? This is certainly Marivaudage in structure, even if
Pamela be not indebted to La Vie de Marianne for its plot.
But Richardson wrote in letter-form, a style that seems always
to produce degeneration in the paragraph-conscience. Fielding,
writing under no such artificial scheme, is a better paragrapher
than his predecessor. The paragraph word-length in Tom Jones
is 101.86, or 2.43 sentences of 41.92 words. The percentage of
paragraphed sentences is high (38 per cent.), but this fact is not
due* principally to dialogue ; the great novelist studied carefully
the unity of his narrative paragraphs. His principle in dialogue
is, I think, something like this : paragraph primarily for unity,
breaking up monologue or massing dialogue // the speeches are
short and the movement rapid ; when the dialogue is leisurely,
paragraph each speech. An example of breaking up monologue
may be seen in Mr. Allworthy's Homily to Jenny, chap, vii.,
Book i. Examples of the massing together of short speeches
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y. 115
when the movement is impassioned or hurried, may frequently
be found. Thus, B. iv., chap. 14, paragraphs 12, 13 ; B. v.,
chap. 4, paragraph 2 ; B. v., chap. 6, paragraph 17 ; B. vi., chap.
6, paragraph 1.
JOHNSON.
Rambler^ 175 0-1752.
Total paragraphs considered 94
Total words considered 9600
Total sentences considered 218
Average words per paragraph 102.13
Average sentences per paragraph 2.32
Average words per sentence 44>o3
RasseiaSy r759.
Total paragraphs considered 58
Total words considered 5357
Total sentences considered 174
Average words per paragraph 92.36
Average sentences per paragraph 3
Average words per sentence 30'78
Rasselas -\- Rambler.
Total paragraphs considered 152
Total words considered I4»957
Total sentences considered 392
Average words per paragraph 98.40
Average sentences per paragraph 2.58
Average words per sentence 38.15
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 27
Per cent, of sentences of less than 1 5 words 9
Lives of the Poets, 1779-1781.
(Gerwig, for 500 periods.)
Average predications per sentence 3.23
Per cent, of simple sentences 16
Per cent, of clauses saved 7.09
Everybody knows that Johnson's style varies in different
works. This variation follows a steady chronological develop-
ment toward the vernacular: the Rambler, 1750-1752, is the
most latinized of his works; the Lives, 1779-1781, is the
least latinized. Rasselas, 1759, stands midway in development.
1 16 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
The sentence drops one-third of its length between the Rambler
and Rasselas^ but the paragraph drops only one-tenth. 1 have
no complete count for the Lives, but should guess that the sen-
tence still grows considerably shorter, and that the paragraph
remains approximately in statu quo,
Johnson's paragraph is remarkably short. In the Rambler
there are but 2.32 sentences to the paragraph ; the two rises to
three in Rasselas, The fewness of the sentences per paragraph
and the high percentage (27 per cent.) of paragraphed sentences
are phenomena not due in either case to dialogue. Johnson was
exceedingly particular that each paragraph should form an
integer ; beyond this he cared not how few the sentences.
His favorite order is loose, with a large share of deductive
paragraphs. He loves a short introductory sentence, and when
the chance permits he likes to make this sentence a generalization
far wider than can be substantiated from the subsequent details.
In the matter of proportion by varying short sentences with
long Johnson in his later work is by no means weak. Even in
the earlier works the percentage of sentences of less than 15
words is considerable — 9 per cent, in Rambler and Rasselas,
while the Lives shows 16 per cent, of simple sentences.
As to coherence, it is common to accuse Johnson, as De
Quincey did, of " plethoric and tautologic tympany of sentence ;" ^
or to say with Coleridge that his antitheses are usually verbal
only.'' But, at least in Rasselas and the Lives, the style is after
all highly coherent. The antithesis is of course elaborate, but
it has the effect of parallel construction and is not seriously
retarding. The directness of the thought and the skill of the
balance do away with the necessity of formal connectives. Few
men have used initial connectives less than Johnson did, and
none has depended less upon them. Of 300 sentences in Ras-
selas 25 only are joined by formal conjunctives, whether initially
or internally. The list is short. And occurs but once.
^fVorJks,X.,i28.
' Table Talk, Nov. I, 1833.
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y. 117
Connective. Initial. Interior.
Thus 3 I
But 10
However i i
So I I
Yet 3 I
Therefore . . 3
And yet i
Johnson's chief contribution to the development is this man-
agement of coherence without the use of connectives. Contrast
the day when Walton showed eighty initial ands to 300 sen-
tences, and the time when Johnson wrote but one and to the same
number — 300. When Johnson did use connectives, they were
never formal. As Coleridge said, " You cannot alter one of them
without spoiling the sense." ' Johnson likewise fixed permanently
as a model the loose order, with a preference for the deductive
type.
JOSEPH BUTLER.
The involutions of the sentence in the Analogy are often
impassable, as Emerson would say, and utterly opposed to par-
agraph structure. Butler is mentioned here merely for the fact
that he has a larger percentage of strictly inductive paragraphs
than almost any other writer in the language. It may be added
that when his sentences are short they usually need the light of
the whole section to make their bearing plain.
HUME.
History of England, Vol. I., 1754.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Total words considered 47»775
Total sentences considered 1200
Average words per paragraph 238.87
Average sentences per paragraph 6
Average words per sentence 39.8 1
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs i
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length 48-697
Per cent, of sentences of less than 1 5 words 5
» Table Talk, July 3, 1833.
1 18 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Per cent, of simple sentences i 12
Average predications per sentence (Gerwig) J 3.29
Per cent, of clauses saved / 14.71
Dr. Johnson declared that Hume's style was not English, but
French. If he meant by this that Hume was careful to use le mot
propre, and that the study of French models had taught him more
sententiousness than was then common in an English writer,- and
again that Hume aimed always at lucidity, why, then, Dr.
Johnson was right. But in general structure Hume is not
French : his sentences and paragraphs are too long, too
monotonous. Johnson's own sentence was nearer French
models, in the one point of length, than Hume's was. John-
son's paragraph is but half the length of Hume's. Johnson's
own use of the very short sentence was better and more Gallic
than Hume's : Hume shows but 5 per cent, of sentences fall
ing below the length of fifteen words, while Johnson shows 9
per cent. Hume has French lucidity, but he is stately, meas-
ured, cold. Johnson, unconsciously following Gallic precedent*
delights in short single-sentence sections, even to the extent of 27
per cent, of his whole number. Hume disdains a paragraph of
less than five sentences, and writes but one per cent, of paragraphed
periods. Johnson, out of 152 paragraphs, shows many successive
paragraphs of one sentence, many of two, but none of ^-^t,
Hume, out of 200 paragraphs, shows many successive groups of
five sentences, but none of one, none of two. Johnson shows no
successive groups of more than six sentences each ; but Hume
shows such groups of seven, of eight, of nine. As regards
structure, therefore. Dr. Johnson's dictum hardly holds ; though
no one could dispute that dictum in the matter of Hume's vocab-
ulary.
Hume is impeccable in paragraph unity from the point of
view of subject analysis. His unity depends on the philosophic
scheme, the previsedly careful articulation of framework. It is
not the picturesque unity of Macaulay.
In spite of occasional extreme sententiousness, and his very
sparing use of sentence-connectives, Hume's coherence is always
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCEY. 119
good. The sententiousness is never left unexplained. If the
reader is ever delayed it is by the balance of the sentence, but he
is never seriously checked by this. In Hume the formal balance
breaks in upon the sequence as waves pass beneath a boat and lap
it sharply, but only to drive it onward.
Hume*s favorite order is loose, with a tendency to eschew
initiatory sentences. The topic sentence is likely to be somewhat
indefinite, becoming clear with the first amplifying sentences.
To sum up : Hume represents the long paragraph adapting
itself to the Johnsonian balanced sentence. His integers of style
are larger than Johnson's, but less unwieldy than Gibbon's. He
is retrogressive in percentage of very short sentences.
STERNE.
A Sentimental Journey^ 1768.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average words per paragraph 71.37
Average sentences per paragraph 1.95
Average words per sentence 36.50
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 55
Limits of fluctuation in word-length of paragraph . . . 5-208
Sterne is in many respects the most eccentric of our prosaists.
M. Scherer would have it that he is wilfully sensational and
meretricious — a literary mountebank. I should like to find some
method in his madness, even at a point where he seems maddest :
/. e. his habit of making a chapter of a few words. Chapter xiii.,
vol. ii., of Tristram, contains one paragraph, three sentences (in
dialogue) — a total of 29 words. Chapter xxvii., vol. iii., has two
paragraphs, four sentences, 83 words. Chapter v., vol. v., has
one paragraph, one sentence, 16 words. Chapter xxxix., vol. v.,
contains one paragraph, two sentences, 30 words. There are a
dozen other chapters similar in length to these. All this is freak-
ish enough, but is not so very odd in view of Sterne's long study
of French models, from which he had learned the trick of the
tiny paragraph. He chose to emphasize a thought by paragraph-
ing it, as Anglo-Saxon scribes had done, long before — and it
was but one bold step further, in the process of emphasis by
I20 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
mechanical means, to make a chapter of the paragraph as he had
made a paragraph of the sentence. It is hardly to the point
for a critic to complain that these chapters are logically incom-
plete. Sterne was analyzing, not logically, but rhetorically ;
fastening attention on these small stadia simply for the imagina-
tive suggestions involved in their pregnant brevity. 1 must, for
one, confess to thinking the thing sometimes shrewdly done.
Sterne is a lawless wight, but his recusancy has given us some
things both quaint and good.
There is little else of importance to note of Sterne's para-
graphs. In managing dialogue he follows Fielding.
HUGH BLAIR.
The only reason for mentioning Blair amid so many of
his betters is that he wrote popular lectures on rhetoric, in
which he said a deal about proportioning the sentence, but noth-
••' ing about the paragraph ; and one is curious to see if such men
as Blair, Campbell, and Kames, personally followed paragraph law.
Blair's smooth Shaftesburian style leads him securely from sen-
tence to sentence ; he writes nearly six monotonous sentences to
the paragraph ; he follows the loose order of procedure in the
paragraph, and observes the law of unity. In brief, it is strange
that such mildly correct rhetoricians as he, wrote respectable par-
agraphs, but, amid the multitude of their stylistic theories, had no
theory of the process.
GOLDSMITH.
Vicar of Wakefield^ 1766.
Total paragraphs considered 107
Total words considered 23,390
Total sentences considered 868
Average words per paragraph 218.59
Average sentences per paragraph 8.1 1
Average words per sentence 26.94
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 8
Limits of fluctuation in word-length of paragraphs . . 25-976
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words 15
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y, I2I
The Bee, and The Citizen of the World.
(Gerwig, for 500 periods.)
Average predications, per sentence 2.95
Per cent, of simple sentences 18
Per cent, of clauses saved 6.35
In Goldsmith we have a respectable degree of variability in
sentence-length, and therefore of one chief element of propor-
tion — though other sense of paragraphic proportion Gold-
smith had none. The general sentence-length is low, and 15
per cent, of the sentences fall below 15 words; on the other
hand there are a few periods of more than 100 words.
Goldsmith*s narrative sequence is perfect, little needing nor
mucH using connectives. He has not such unity as some descrip-
tive and narrative writers of the day, Fielding, for instance. He
follows Fielding carelessly in the handling of dialogue.
BURKE.
On Conciliation with America, 1775.
Total paragraphs considered 145
Total words considered 23,907
Total sentences considered 916
Average words per paragraph 164.87
Average sentences per paragraph 6.31
Average words per sentence 26.09
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 18
Limits of fluctuation in word-length of paragraph. . . 16-559
On the Sublime and Beautiful, 1756.
Total paragraphs : loi
Average sentences per paragraph 1 1.68
Burke's Sublime and Beautiful is divided into parts headed as
sections. These are rarely broken by indentation and are so
short as to constitute relatively isolated paragraphs. Relatively,
because it happens that one section may grow out of another, and
accordingly begin with such a word as but (e. g., part 3, § 15,
part 4, § 12) or hence (e. g., part 5, § 6). In length the sections
vary from five lines to as many pages, the average number of
sentences being eleven.
122 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
But it is in his oratory that Burke*s paragraphs are remark-
able. He exhibits here such qualities as make him the best
paragrapher our literature produced before the present century.
His unity is simple (as opposed to that of compound para-
«
graphs) and organic. His paragraph bears the test, as Wendell
has pointed out, ' of having its substance expressed in one organic
sentence.
For purposes of oratorical emphasis and oratorical rhythm,
he has completely mastered the short sentence. His percentage
of sentences of less than fifteen words is higher than the highest
yet reached. Shaftesbury's was 26 per cent., Burke's is 29 per
cent. " Blithe, crisp sentences" Burke is fond of using at the
beginning and the end of a paragraph. Of 145 paragraphs in
Conciliation, 22 per cent, begin with a sentence of less than 15
words; 11 per cent, with a sentence of less than 10 words.
The effect is striking. Here are certain such terse introductions :
" The proposition is peace." " My idea is nothing more." " My
next objection is its uncertainty." " First, the people of the
colonies are descendants of Englishmen." "The march of the
human mind is slow." " My next example is Wales." " This is
an assertion of fact." Genung, a good observer, has noted' in
Burke the fine effect produced by putting last in a paragraph a sin-
gle terse, summarizing sentence. It is in the body of the para-
graph that Burke introduces his shortest periods — those of
one, two, three, four, five, six words each. These come in some-
times like veritable thunder-claps, enforcing the long, preceding
propositions or forcing attention to those about to come.
We inspect Burke's coherence. This he owes but little to
formal contrivances. But is the only initial connective that
appears frequently ; the oratorical mood is, perhaps, inclined to
exaggerate the prominence of adversative ideas. Burke gives
small heed to conjunctions, but he is explicit in his refer-
ence, usually making each sentence contain some word that refers
closely to the preceding sentence ; this word is very often one
'^English Composition, p. 124. '^ Practical Rhetoric, p. 209.
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y. 123
repeated from that preceding sentence. Again, he secures coher-
ence by regular construction. His sentences rarely contain
sudden and awkward change of method. No contemporary author
employed parallel construction with such freedom, such variety,
such subtlety of effect. At its best, the tide of his style moves
with most rapid sweep, each thought starting in the same line as
its neighbor, each sentence pushed on by the preceding, each
falling to the point in swift succession, like waves on the beach.
Now and then there is a redundance of words that quiets the
movement, but does not alter its method. In this movement
there is no conflict of unmanaged masses of thought, as in Tay-
lor, no choppy sea of antithesis, as in Johnson at his worst.
Angus speaks of sentences " each a complete thought, easily
separable from the rest of the paragraph," ' as common in John-
son and Burke ; but the remark is hardly just to Burke. Burke*s
coherence, again, is enhanced by the order of his sentences and
words. The great orator had, to a degree uncommon even in
the most eminent orators, the power of marshalling his proposi-
tions in a specious order. His emotion never ran away with
him ; he drove straight at his hearer's intellect — did so too con-
stantly for his highest immediate success. There is always the
impression of a convincing chain of logic.
In short, Burke is the earliest great master of the paragraph,
and in impassioned prose he still remains a master of the para-
graph. But for his lingering sense of the prime importance of
balancing and rounding the sentence he is a nineteenth- century
paragrapher, and one of the best.
GIBBON.
Rome,Yo\, I., 1776.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Total words considered 48,748
Total sentences considered 1562
Average words per paragraph 243.74
Average sentences per paragraph 7.81
Average words per sentence 31.21
^ Handbook of the English Tongue^ § 736.
124 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs o
Per cent, of paragraphs of two sentences 25
Limits of fluctuation in word-length of paragraph.. . 49-484
Per cent, of sentences of less than fifteen words 10
Gibbon's paragraphs may be said to have unity, if we admit
that historical narrative tends toward a compound unit. Gibbon
not infrequently subdivides his paragraphs by numerals, and
often we feel that the undivided long sections contain subordinate
stadia.
He is retrogressive in the matter of sentence-length. Only
10 per cent, of his sentences fall below the 15 -mark. His
stately and sonorous periods have a harmony of their own, but it
is not paragraph harmony. His sentences have much propor-
tion, his paragraphs little. We admire the comprehensive analy-
sis of the discourse into chapters and paragraphs, but we do not
quite feel that the paragraph is an organism. It is a well-defined
cage in which the splendid sentence is confined.
His movement is not rapid, but the sequence is in general sure.
Demonstratives are numerous. When an introductory pronoun
would be ambiguous he adds a noun, seldom a repeated one,
but rather a synonym.
Inversions, so frequent in Burke, are infrequent here. Con-
junctions the author utterly despises, depending on the sheer
inertia of his rolling sentences to carry the thought ahead. No
other writer examined shows so small a list of sentence-
connectives. The abandonment of them is Gibbon's only con-
tribution to the development ; and it may be questioned if the
contribution is a real or a permanent one, depending as it does
on balance in the sentence. Here is the list — showing but
17 connected sentences out of 300 :
Connectives. Initial. Interior.
But 9
Yet 3
However . . 2
And yet i
Nor I
And thus i
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCEY, 125
It may be added that Gibbon's usual order is loose, but that
a really deductive paragraph is rare. It is a mistake to suppose
that Gibbon abounds in abstract general statements. He is,
indeed, fond of the abstract noun, as Minto ^ has remarked ; but
he does not make sweeping generalizations in the Johnsonian
manner.
PA LEY.
Moral and Political Philosophy, 1785.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Total words considered I4»77i
Total sentences considered , 392
Average words per paragraph 73.85
Average sentences per paragraph 1.96
Average words per sentence 37'68
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 58
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length 6-575
The averages given above from Paley are lower in paragraph-
length than many parts of Paley would yield. The paragraph-
length would, nevertheless, have been reduced still further but for a
few cases where a single sentence, broken by Paley into several
paragraphs, was counted as a single compound one.
Paley is the most prominent instance among modern writers
of a man who paragraphed on the theory of emphasis. His
mechanical devices for securing prominence were numerous —
different kinds of type, numerals, etc. But the man that takes
up only mechanical means for securing emphasis, usually perishes
by the same means : he loses in proportion what he gains in
emphasis. Paley is a shining illustration of this fact. Minto,
by the way, who has written about Paley 's method of analysis,
does not, I believe, note all of his mechanical devices. Paley
used double spacing to separate groups of paragraphs. Thus B.
1., chap. 7, B. ii., chaps. 4, 7, 12. Another device is the very
short chapter, as B. i., chap, i, which has three paragraphs, three
sentences, 76 words.
Paley's coherence depends upon conjunctions more than one
^ Alaniial^ p. 484.
126 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
would expect from so great a logician. The construction of his
sentences and the order of words helps his coherence little or
nothing.
SCOTT.
Ivanhoe, 1820.
Total paragraphs considered 551
Total words considered 39»340
Total sentences considered 1224
Average words per paragraph 71 .39
Average sentences per paragraph 2.22
Average words per sentence 32.14
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 45
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length 3-338
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words 14
Hazlitt was not far wrong when, in criticising the early style
of the author of Waverley, he said: "There is neither momentum
nor elasticity in it ; I mean as to the score, or effect upon the ear." '
That style gained in vigor as years went by, but, except in the
most impassioned passages, the sentences continue to ramble to
the last. Even the dialogue is not equal to checking the diffuse-
ness. An average of 31 words to the sentence, with only 14 per
cent, of sentences under 15 words, is no help to the popularity of
a novelist.
In Scott the paragraphing of conversation proceeds by the
modern method uniformly.
His narrative and descriptive paragraphs have a certain unity
always, and at times reveal a very high degree of picturesque
grouping. The general straightforward coherence of his para-
graphs is not to be disputed.
COLERIDGE.
The Friend, 1809.
Total paragraphs considered 100
Total words considered 29,241
Total sentences considered 777
Average words per paragraph 292.41
Average sentences per paragraph 7.77
Average words per sentence 37.6
^On the Prose Style of Poets, \ 2.
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y. 127
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 8
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length 45-758
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words 17
Poetry, Drama, Shakespeare.
(Gerwig, for 500 periods.)
Average predications per sentence 3.33
Per cent, of simple sentences 19
Per cent, of clauses saved 11. 10
At the beginning of the present century the journalistic
short sentence was becoming popular. It had not, however,
crept into the work of the literary dictators, and it is a little sur-
prising that Coleridge should attack with such severity as he
did, in the third issue of the Friend, a form of sentence that
was not influencing the great reviews. Jeffrey was writing a sen-
tence of Elizabethan proportions ; De Quincey*s sentence could
hardly be spoken of as having anything in common with the
"fashionable Anglo-Gallican taste" that Coleridge hated and
that De Quincey, on the unconscious principle of elective affinity,
praised. How little real hold the very short sentence acquired
maybe seen later — considerably later, to be sure — when in 1840
De Quincey was uttering his lament that "the too general tend-
ency of our sentences is toward hyperbolical length.'*'
At any rate, Coleridge resolved not to cater much to French
models. In the third essay of the Friend he admits that he
may have injured his own style by solitary, inarticulate medita-
tion, and by over-admiration for the Jacobean prosaists : but he
then turns to attack the short sentence. " It is true that these
short and unconnected sentences are easily and instantly under-
stood ; but it is equally true that wanting all the cement of
thought as well as of style, all the connections, and ( if you will
forgive so trivial a metaphor) all the hooks-and-eyes of the
memory, they are easily forgotten ; or rather, it is equally impos-
sible that they should be remembered."
The practical — or impractical — result of this philosophizing
appears in the style of the Friend. Here is Brandl's com-
^ Essay on Style.
128 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH
ment. " He reveled also in abstract expressions, and built up
the most involved periods in the attempt to forestall every
variety of objection. The paragraphs are so perversely arranged
that the point is difficult to find ; and the arrangement of
chapters lacks all order."' The perverseness of the paragraphs
comes from an attempt — not a victorious attempt — to follow the
intricate order of the thought as it occurred in the writer's mind :
hence also the large percentage of imperfectly developed induc-
tive paragraphs.
Some qualification must be made of the statement that Cole-
ridge's sentences are involved. There are splendid exceptions in
quantities, where he actually succeeds in performing difficult evolu-
tions without ambiguity or obscurity. Again, Coleridge is not
without some command of the short sentence. Of 777 sentences,
1 7 per cent, average less than 1 5 words. He can, when he needs
it as a foil to a long and difficult period, use the disintegrating
sentence with an oral force and directness like Emerson's. He
tends, indeed, to put his paragraph-topic in a short sentence, for
emphasis.
Coleridge is " sequacious," even when he rambles ; seer though
he is, he omits no step ; his style is not only redintegrating, but,
at times, almost impartially so — as if narcotism had touched his
selective faculty. He uses more " hooks-and-eyes " than any
writer of his time, more, I presume, than any great English lit-
terateur of the century. Of 300 sentences in the Friend^ 100 are
formally connected — up to that day a higher proportion than
that of any man after Walton. The list of formal connectives is
as follows, the initial connectives being double the interior in
number :
Connective. Initial. Interior.
For 12
Again 2
Therefore . . 11
But 26
In short i
Then . . 5
^ Life of Coleridge^ trans. Lady Eastlake, p. 300.
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y,
129
Connective.
At least
And
And yet
Now
Too
Indeed
Thus
Accordingly
It is true
Nor
On the contrary . .
On the other hand
Hitherto
Yet
Consequently ....
In other words
Lastly
However
Add to
So
Moreover
Likewise
First (etc.)
Further
Initial.
• •
5
I
3
• •
I
2
I
I
I
I
I
I
4
I
I
I
• ■
I
2
I
Interior.
3
5
2
I
2
I
JEFFREY.
Alison on Taste: revised form, Encyclopcedia Britannica^ 1824.
Total paragraphs considered 100
Total words considered 27,608
Total sentences considered 545
Average words per paragraph 276.08
Average sentences per paragraph 5.45
Average words per sentence 50.65
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 3
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length 54-665
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words 6
In spite of its undeniable verboseness, Jeffrey's style was con-
sidered brilliant and sprightly. How such a verdict could be
passed on a style whose average sentence is fifty words, with
only 6 per cent, of very short sentences to vary the monotony, is
I30 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
hard for a modern reader to see. The secret lies in the compar-
ative absence of periodicity. Jeffrey*s huge sentences are mere
groups of clauses. Many clauses are oppositional ; these are often
set off by dashes. Jeffrey went as far in the direction of aggre-
gating loose clauses as Macaulay went in the direction of segre-
gating them. Otherwise, in the case of these two men, one style
is almost as modern as the other. Jeffrey's length of paragraph
is not far from Macaulay's. As a structural unit Jeffrey's lacks
emphasis, from neglect of the short period : Macaulay's lacks
gradation of emphasis, from his neglect of the moderately long
period. Jeffrey makes clauses out of periods ; Macaulay makes
periods out of clauses.
Jeffrey's usual paragraph order is loose. His subject is often
delayed, however, by verbose introductions. He has no sense of
the importance of the first sentence and the last. His coherence
is good but not graceful. There is occasional abuse of coordinate
conjunctions.
LAMB.
Essays of Elia ,1822.
Total paragraphs considered 87
Total words considered 14,386
Total sentences considered 529
Average words per paragraph 165.35
Average sentences per paragraph 6.08
Average words per sentence 27.19
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 15
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length 15-726
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words. 41
The gentle Elia was in his own day the uncomplaining target
of much windy criticism as to his mechanology. Lamb's sentence
and Lamb's paragraph were short, and therefore a source of worry
to De Quincey, who complained that "the most felicitous passages
always accomplished their circuit in a few sentences;'" and again
that Lamb had no proper sense of the epic; — that "the solemn
planetary wheelings of the Paradise Lost were not to his taste."^
Though this could hardly be denied, a few essays of Lamb
* Works, v., p. 234. ^ Works, V., p. 236.
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y. 131
show that he really had some command of the long paragraph :
such are, " The Sanity of True Genius ^^"^ and, " On the Genteel Style
of Writing'' But still. Lamb is likely to digress when he
attempts a long section. Indeed, he usually avoids the long
section, preferring to digress by paragraphs, — and so charmingly
that we would not have him do otherwise.
The unity of the short paragraphs is usually a rhetorical
unity. He sometimes uses the short section purely for emphasis,
and in all cases he is shy of logical division. Indeed, Professor
Hunt represents Taine as maintaining that "Lamb aimed to
destroy the great aristocratical style as it sprang from methodical
analyses and court conventions."' If this remark refers to the
passage given below,"" from the Histoire^ it is not quite exact. These
words of Taine about the grand aristocratic style were written oi
the romantic school, and with reference to poetry. Lamb*s name
happens to st^nd near in the context, but it is Lamb the author
of John Woodvil, Lamb the devotee of the sixteenth century.
' English Prose and Prose Writers^ p. 367.
^Speaking of " I'dcole romantique anglaise," Taine says : lis avaient rompu
violemment avec la tradition, et sautaient par-dessus toute la culture classique
pour aller prendre leurs modules dans la Renaissance et le moyen age. L'un
d'eux, Charles Lamb, comme Sainte-Beuve, avait ddcouvert et restaur^ le seizi-
•feme sifecle. Les dramatistes les plus incultes, Marlowe par example, leur
paraissaient admirables, et lis allaient chercher dans les recueils de Percy et de
Warton, dans les vieilles ballades nationales et dans les anciennes poesies
^trang^res, I'accent naif et primitif qui avait manqud a la littdrature classique,
et dont la presence leur semblait la marque de la vdritd et de la beauts. Par-
dessus toute r^forme, ils travaillaient a briser le grand style aristocratique et
•oratoire, tel qu'il dtait nd de I'analyse mdthodique et des convenances de cour.
lis se proposaient " d'adapter aux usages de la podsie le langage ordinaire de
la conversation, tel qu'il est employ^ dans la moyenne et la basse classe," et de
remplacer les phrases ^tudides et la vocabulaire noble par les tons naturels et
les mots jpldb^iens. A la place de Pancien moule, ils essayaient la stance, le
sonnet, la ballade, le vers blanc, avec les rudesses et les cassures des poetes
primitifs. Ils reprenaient ou arrangeaient les metres et la diction du treizi^me
et du seizi^me si^cle. Charles Lamb dcrivait une tragddie d'archdologue qu'on
€ftt pu croire contemporaine du r^gne d'Elisabeth, etc.
^ Histoire de la Litterature Anglaise^ Paris, 1887. Tome quatrifeme, p. 286.
132 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
For all this, it is entirely true that Lamb was not devoted to
logical analysis in prose.
Lamb's use of the short sentence was incomparably freer, and
as Mr. Pater might have said, " blither," than that of any of his
predecessors. In sentence-length, indeed, he exhibits all the
variability of insanity. His sentences fretted De Quincey :
" Lamb had no sense of the rhythmical in prose composition.
Rhythmus, or pomp of cadence, or sonorous ascent of clauses, in
the structure of sentences, were effects of art as much thrown
away upon him as the voice of the charmer upon the deaf adder."'
Some of Lamb's "sentences and periods" made the author of the
English Mail Coach " shriek with anguish of recoil." Doubtless
to De Quincey the most abhorrent of these " sentences and
periods " were those of two or three words, verb to be supplied
from the reader's store of predicates. One can imagine the
Opium Eater thrown into hysteria by Lamb's way of setting forth
the bachelors of the South Sea House : " Hence they formed a
sort of Noah's ark. Odd fishes. A large monastery. Domestic
retainers in a great house, kept more for show than use." For
my own part, I confess to being, just at this minute, in the mood
to like this indefensible sentence-making. How the device
flashes the conceits upon us ! We catch the first delicious over-
emphasis of discovery — the very conception and birth of quaint
fancies in the mind of a humorous genius.
In spite of now and then a long but harmless parenthesis. Lamb
knew the value of the paragraph structure — knew it better than
Coleridge did, or De Quincey. Hardly one of his shorter sections
but is an artistic whole. The order is loose. The mass is often
perfect — the topic striking the eye instantly, and the paragraph
ending with words that deserve emphasis.
What shall we say of his coherence ? Coleridge, speaking in
1833, doubtless thought of Elia as one of "those modern books in
which, for the most part, the sentences in a page have the same
connection with each other that marbles have in a bag ; they
^ Works, v., 235.
I
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y. 133
touch without adhering.*' ' But where would be Lamb's charm if
his sentences were a third longer, and thick with "hooks-and-
eyes"? The fact is that Lamb's style, on any subject Lamb
would have been willing to touch, would be easier to follow than
Coleridge's, no matter how far afield the whimsical Elia might
wander. For there are no long intervals between Lamb's propo-
sitions, no involved restrictions of those propositions, no neces-
sity of supplying anything except a few obvious verbs and the
sense of a few freakish vocables.
LANDOR.
Imaginary Conversations {Sovereigns and Statesmen).
Total paragraphs considered 200
Total words considered I7»697
Total sentences considered 696
Average words per paragraph 88.48
Average sentences per paragraph 3.48
Average words per sentence 25.43
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 34
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words 22
Any statistics drawn from the Conversations are of course
modified by the dialogue form. This explains the large number
of paragraphed sentences, and the brevity of the paragraph.
Though the Conversations yield Landor's most brilliant style, we
shall base what we have to say of the structure more upon the
pieces of continuous prose than upon these dialogues, which are
so good in dramatic rjOo^ as sometimes to seem anything but
characteristically Landorian.
Landor is uneven in the matter of unity. He can keep severely
to one topic, but he often forgets. He will begin an important
paragraph on, say, Laura's decreasing coldness towards Petrarca,
and, after illustrating this point by a remarkably inapposite
account of the lady being kissed at a ball by Charles of Luxem-
burg, will proceed to tell you in the same paragraph of Petrarca's
travels and visits in the following summer.* Generally, however,
Landor's frequent digressions proceed by whole paragraphs.
' Table Talk, July 3, 1833. =See Works, VIIL, 438.
134 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
In the matter of proportion Landor has very considerable
merits, though by no means the highest. He pays little attention
to proportion by bulk ; but he uses the semicolon and the period
with great skill to secure right distribution of emphasis. Here,
however, the principle of euphony often interferes. No author
ever surpassed Landor in such tricks of melody as introducing at
the end of a resounding period a very brief colon clause for
cadence.' These skillful variations sometimes misplace the thought
emphasis. When, however, the two principles coincide in the
application, the effect is perfect. The felicitous combination
occurs oftener in the short than in the long paragraphs. In the
longer ones we sometimes feel that the writer is caring nothing
for precision — only for the infinite variety of prose modulation
which he himself describes — that "amplification of harmonies,
of which even the best and most varied poetry admits but few."
Landor's style is intuitive and segregating ; the incoherence
of it is its weakest point. Mr. Sidney Colvin somewhat, but not
greatly, over-states the case when he says : " The best skeleton
type of a Landorian sentence is that which we quoted some pages
back on Lord Byron : * I had avoided him ; I had slighted him ;
he knew it ; he did not love me ; he could not.' No conjunctions,
no transitions ; each statement made by itself, and their \sic\
connection left to be discovered by the reader .... But whether
to the sequence of propositions in an argument, or the sequence
of incidents in a narrative, Landor's style is less adapted.'" Mr.
Leslie Stephen ^ speaks of Landor rounding off transitions grace-
fully. I cannot quite make out what this means, unless it means
transition in melody. The rest of the passage in Stephen forms
a good comment on Landor's coherence, and not less directly
on his unitv : " He is so desirous to round off his transitions
gracefully, that he obliterates the necessary indications of the
main divisions of the subject. When criticising Milton or Dante,
^ A friend reminds me, in this connection, of Swinburne's fondness for end-
ing a stanza with a short line.
"^ Landor^ English Men of Letters ^ p. 223.
"^ Hours in a Library^ 3d series, p. 245, London, 1879.
TEMPLE TO DE QUINCE Y. 135
he can hardly keep his hand off the finest passages in his desire
to pare away superfluities. Treating himself in the same fashion,
he leaves none of those little signs, which, like the typographical
hand prefixed to a notice, are extremely convenient, though
strictly superfluous. It is doubtless unpleasant to have the hard
framework of logical divisions showing too distinctly in an argu-
ment, or to have a too elaborate statement of dates and places and
external relations in a romance. But such aids to the memory
may be removed too freely. The building may be injured by
taking away the scaffolding."
His coherence is often helped by parallel construction ; but,
again, the movement is a little retarded by the perfect balance of
the sentences, as we have seen in older authors. In his later
reading of Landor, Mr. Lowell " began to be not quite sure
whether the balance of his sentences, each so admirable by itself,
did not grow wearisome in continuous reading, — whether it did
not hamper his freedom of movement, as when a man poises a
pole upon his chin."'
The minor breaks in Landor's coherence are usually due, not
to false logic, but to a habit of vague reference and allusion.
Landor assumed a high degree of literary information and
appreciation on the part of his audience. He felt himself to be
writing for the few. The chosen guests who were to " sup late "
at his feast would be willing, for the sake of the elect camaraderie,
to dispense with overmuch table-service.
IRVING.
Sketch Book, 1820.
Total paragraphs considered 129
Total words considered 14,220
Total sentences considered 532
Average words per paragraph 1 10.23
Average sentences per paragraph 4.12
Average words per sentence 26.73
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 17
Irving is in his way a skillful paragrapher. No matter how
^ Latest Literary Essays, p. 45 ; WorkSy Boston, 1892.
136 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
great the license of his subject, he always gives an impression of
unity. He follows the loose order almost exclusively, keeping
his statement of details closely within the limits prescribed by his
opening sentence. His transitions are faultless, the number of
connectives being greater, however, than the placing of words
requires.
About one-quarter of his sentences are shorter than 1 5 words,
and nearly one-half (41 per cent.) are under 20 words. He
adapts the short sentence to the smooth and graceful manner of
Addison. He does not, indeed, ever succeed in flashing out a
complex thought in a telling and emphatic way ; but as a type of
the urbane, leisurely, correct manner, he is exemplary.
CHAPTER. VIII.
DE QUINCEY TO HOLMES.
Although we have included in the preceding chapter several
writers of the nineteenth century, all of these, with the possible
exception of Landor, belong properly, in structure, to the eight-
eenth. De Quincey's stands as a dividing style between the two
periods. The new period differs from the old, not in kind but
in degree. In the nineteenth century the paragraph is organized
as in the eighteenth, but acquires greater concentration. The
emphasis of the short sentence is more keenly felt and more
effectually employed. The unity is more organic. The coher-
ence depends less and less on formal connectives. The question
of mass receives its first serious attention.
DE QUINCEY.
opium Eater ^ 1822.
Total paragraphs considered 89
Total words considered 31*634
Total sentences considered 815
Average words per paragraph 355*42
Average sentences per paragraph 9.16
Average words per sentence 38.81 '
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 14
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words 13
Limits of fluctuation m paragraph word-length 13-1441
Average predications per sentence ( Gerwig, ) 3.69
Per cent, of simple sentences for 500 [-14
Per cent, of clauses saved periods.) ) 5.49
When wer ask ourselves whether De Quincey's paragraphs are
units we find it necessary to limit the word unity more closely
than usual. Classical unity, severe, selective, exclusive, he rarely
shows. On the other hand his essays were preceded by the most
' Sherman finds 33-I-. My own count is from the second American
edition, purporting to give the original text.
137
138 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
careful analysis, and there is no doubt that he considered each
paragraph with regard to unity. We may say of his longer para-
graphs that the best show unity in somewhat wide variety, while in
all cases he returns consciously, from digressions within the para-
graph, to the topic. As a rule his long and numerous digres-
sions proceed by whole paragraphs.
In the matter of proportion he is deficient. He expands the
unimportant at the expense of the important. His use of the
short sentence is usually half-hearted. No author who writes but
14 per cent, of simple sentences can obtain the highest effects in
paragraph-structure. De Quincey, for purposes of rhythm, will
give you numerous terse clauses within the sentence, but he fails
to distribute the emphasis of his paragraph justly by means of
the terse period. There are some exceptions to this general
dictum, however. In Levana and Our Ladies of Sorrow we have
most effective emphasis- proportion ; nothing could be finer.
De Quincey's coherence is notoriously good. Mr. Stephen
puts the general verdict thus : *' He is careful to show you the
minutest details of his argumentative mechanism. Each step in
the process is elaborately and separately set forth ; you are not
assumed to know anything, or to be capable of supplying any
links for yourself; it shall not even be taken for granted without
due notice that things which are equal to a third thing are equal
to each otner ; and the consequence is, that few people venture
to question processes which seem to be so plainly set forth, and
to advance by such careful development." '
Few authors are so redintegrating. The criticism which De
Quincey applies to a certain style, quoting a French expression
from Archbishop Huet, is applicable to his own style ; he had that
flux de bouche which " places the reader at the mercy of a man's
tritest remembrances from his own school-boy reading."^ Let
me again quote Mr. Stephen, from the same page as before.
" He is utterly incapable of concentration. He is, from the
^ Hours in a Library^ p. 364, London, 1874.
* Works, X., 236-237 (Edinburgh ed.).
DE QUINCE Y TO HOLMES. I39
very principles on which his style is constructed, the most diffuse
of writers. Other men will pack half-a-dozen distinct proposi-
tions into a sentence, and care little if they are somewhat crushed
and distorted in the process. De Quincey insists upon putting
each of them separately, smoothing them out elabdfately, till not
a wrinkle disturbs their uniform surface, and then presenting each
of them for our acceptance with a placid smile. His very credit-
able desire for lucidity of expression makes him nervously anxious
to avoid any complexity of thought. Each step of his argument,
each shade of meaning, and each fact in his narrative, must have
its own separate embodiment ; and every joint and connecting
link must be carefully and accurately defined. The clearness is
won at a heavy price."
The means by which this unusual "sequaciousness" is secured
are many. First, of course, De Quincey rarely states a truth in
its intuitive form, or at any rate rarely without explaining that
form afterwards. Thus he uses a large number of clauses to
elaborate a given idea. Then he employs with great arj: the
devices of sentence-structure that lend coherence. No author
uses parallel structure more freely and subtilely, shifting the
mode just before it becomes mannerism. He inverts sentences and
clauses constantly — hardly any writer more. Besides having at
command all these structural contrivances he is opulent in con-
nectives. Of 300 sentences in the Opium Eater 75 are formally
joined. The list is as follows :
Connective. Initial. Interior.
For 6
However 4 24
True it is I
Accordingly i i
Nay I
Therefore . . 3
Hence i
And 3
Thus I
But 12
Or I
I40 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH
Connective. Initial. Interior.
Vet I I
Also . . I
On the contrary . . i
So I I
Moreover I
Nevertheless . . i
Now then I
Thereupon i
Indeed i 5
Everyone knows that De Quincey had much to say about
prose rhythm. His theory stands midway between a theory of
rhythm in the period and a theory of rhythm in the paragraph
as a whole. To his remarks about the cumulative effect of the
rhythmus of succeeding clauses (quoted in our section on Lamb)
may be added the following, in which the writer is thinking of
melody, quite as much as of sequence in thought : " It is in the
relation of sentences, in what Horace terms their ^junctura,' that
the true life of composition resides. The mode of their nexus —
the way in which one sentence is made to arise out of another,
and to prepare the opening for a third, — this is the great loom
in which the textile process of the moving intellect reveals itself
and prospers."' Again, speaking of Kant's elephantine period :
" Parts so remote as the beginning and end of such a sentence
can have no sensible relation to each other : not much as regards
their logic, but none at all as regards their more sensuous
qualities, — rhythmus, for instance, or the continuity of meta-
phor.""
De Quincey himself exemplified his own theories of melody.
In the short paragraph of his impassioned prose he has some-
thing that may be called an organic paragraph rhythm. Such a
paragraph will begin with a short cadence or two, followed by a
longer one, and will end in a reverberating roll of dactyls, cretics,
tribrachs, anapaests, what not. Much more rarely it will begin
with a long, swinging cadence, followed by a shorter and a
shorter, till the whole movement comes down to a short stop as
^ Works, X., 258. ^ Works, X., 259.
DE QUINCE Y TO HOLMES. 14 1
with a clash of cymbals. The first movement may be illustrated
by the following paragraph, from the Vision of Sudden Death :
"The moments were numbered; the strife was finished; the
vision was closed. In the twinkling of an eye our flying horses
had carried us to the termination of the umbrageous aisle ; at the
right angles we wheeled into our former direction ; the turn of
the road carried the scene out of my eyes in an instant, and
swept it into my dreams forever."
In the longer paragraphs — the best ones of the impassioned
style — there is most dexterous variation of cadence, the altei-
nation of long and short going on till the music merges in
one long rolling surge, only to emerge at the end as in lapping
waves. Such is the harmony in the description of Our Lady of
Sighs. On the whole, however, there is no deliberate harmonic
organization of the long paragraph as a paragraph.
De Quincey*s finest effects of melody, as indeed of his thought,
are effects of suspense. He is never really rapid in mental move-
ment, or at least not forcibly rapid ; but he delights in the evoca-
tion of a vivid train of images (face to face with an impending
conclusion) in a way to reproduce the lightning-like, multiform
impressions of the mind when under excitement. Similarly his
rhythm may be held back. Thus, in one of the last paragraphs
of the Vision of Sudden Death, he gets a peculiar effect of sus-
pense by ending thus, "But the lady — " and beginning the next
paragraph with a repetition of the same words. In the second
section of the Dream Fugue — the section ends in the midst of a
sentence — the last sentence advances by soft monosyllables — on
tiptoe, so to speak ; it stops with a comma, and the next section
drops into the swinging rhythm once more. Thus: — "and
afterwards, but when I know not, nor how.
Sweet funeral bells from some incalculable distance." etc.
One other witness to De Quincey's rhythmical sense should
be mentioned. He studiously avoids repeating the same number
of sentences in succeeding paragraphs. Thus he has no succes-
sive groups of three, or four, or five, or six sentences ; and there
142 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
is in the Opium Eater only one case of a succession of (two)
groups of seven and one case of a succession of (three) single-
sentence paragraphs.
MACAU LAY.
Essays : Milton, Machiavelli, Dryden, History.' ^
Total paragraphs considered 325
Total words considered 67,158
Average words per paragraph 206.67
Average words per sentence c. 23 . 05
Average sentences per paragraph c. 8 . 96
Average predications per sentence (Gen»'ig, \ 2.17
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs from ' i
Per cent of simple sentences 5604 I 36
Per cent, of clauses saved periods.) . 5.06
History of England.
Total paragraphs 333^
Total words 974»550
Average words per paragraph 291 .96
Average sentences per paragraph 12 . 44
Average words per sentence (Sherman) 23.43
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 2
Per cent, of simple sentences (Genvig, from / 34
Average predications, per sentence 40,000 periods.) \ 2.30
The popular impression that Macaulay is the best of para-
graphers is probably not far from the truth. The great rhetori-
cian bestowed unlimited pains upon his paragraphs, and no pre-
ceding writer began to equal him in conscious appreciation of
the importance of that structure.*
His unity is rhetorical, rather than logical ; but as such it is
nearly always unimpeachable. The sections that contain real
digressions are few indeed.
In the matter of proportion by bulk he is nearly always
admirable. He knows his principal point, and it is on this that
he enlarges. His emphasis-proportion is consciously paragraphic.
* For the total number of words in the Essays (except History) and in the
History of England I am indebted to Professor Sherman.
^ Cf. Trevelyan's account of Macaulay's laboriousness. Life and Letters of
Lord Macaulay^ London, 1886, p. 502.
DE QUINCE Y TO HOLMES. I43
He reveals very great variability in sentence-length/ and drives
home his main topic and his main conclusion in simple sentences.
When he masses clauses it is to relieve each of emphasis and
show the unity of the group as amplifying some previous terse
generalization. He shows such deliberate observance of this
principle that he forms the first basis for the generalization made
in a former chapter : in the best modern paragraphs the distance
between periods is inversely as the emphasis of each included
proposition.
Nevertheless, in this matter o'f distribution of emphasis,
Macaulay is not faultless. It has been the general verdict of
critics that he not infrequently over-emphasizes ; that he magni-
fies clauses into sentences. On the other hand, a writer so well
able to give a reason for his faith as Professor Sherman, defends
Macaulay's short sentence at a point where most critics would
consider it least happy. Thus :
"This impulse to analyze and energize, — to keep the author's
meaning out of the reach of the reader save one notion at a
time, leads Macaulay in his earlier compositions to go against
the fashion of his day and fall foul of the semicolon as a help to
thought. Hence such sentences as these are not infrequent :
* Like the former he was timid and pliable, artful and mean.
But like the latter he had a country.' — * Shallow is a fool. But
his animal spirits supply, to a certain degree, the place of clever-
ness.' — * There are errors in these works. But they are errors
which a writer, situated like Machiavelli, could scarcely avoid.'
Professor Sherman adds in a footnote: **This method of punc-
tuation is manifestly truer to the thought, and will perhaps pre-
vail in time. We are naturally about as loath to give up the
eighteenth-cen-tury punctuation as its natural spelling. As to
^ Shtxvci2iTi (University Studies^ I., 4., p. 348) has noted Macaulay's fond-
ness for groups of sentences of 17 words each. But Sherman also notes
{Ana/yticSj zS^) thsit Macaulay's commonest sentence-lengths are those of 11,
13, 14, 15 ; and that in the essay on History the sentence of maximum frequency
is 14 words (University Studies^ I., 4., p. 360). Macaulay has, on the other hand,
a good many sentences of more than 100 words.
144 HIS'IORY OF THE ENGUSH PARAGRAPH,
the excuse of subordinate conjunctions for making semicolon
clauses, we can go back and learn something from old Homer.
When a sentence is to follow as the explanation of the preceding
statement, it is his favorite practice to introduce it without a
* because' or * since,' and thus allow the reader the satisfaction of
perceiving the relation for himself. Still Homer does not slight
conjunctions: he merely avoids abusing them.'"
For one, I do not see how the punctuation in these passages
from Macaulay is manifestly truer to the thought than semi-
colons would have been. I can hardly believe that in Macaulay's
rapid antithetic thinking these contrasts could possibly have
been segregated before pen touched paper. Only the habit of
exaggerating contrasts for stimulus to the reader's mind, could
have permitted the dropping of the semicolon in a connection
where the act throws a relatively unimportant clause into the same
importance as the short topic sentence. The point about Homer
must be admitted; but though Homer is fond of asyndeton for
explanatory purposes, we are not sure that he could have borne
it to hear one of his rhapsodes drop his voice wherever a conjunc-
tion was omitted.
Macaulay's coherence is dependent upon structural devices.
The paragraph once accepted by the reader as a unit in the
light of whose topic each sentence is to be read, Macaulay's style
is indisputably sequent. True, there is no blending of colors in
the picture : the sentences lie like stones in a mosaic, as Mr.
Stephen puts it, or like marbles in a bag, as Coleridge would have
put it. But there are no gaps in the mosaic, and though the
pieces are distinct, they are numerous and rightly set. Parallel
construction is almost the rule with Macaulay, and it is often
mechanical and noticeable. Inversion is frequent. Connectives
are few — fewer by far than in any man hitherto who has not
been enslaved to the balanced sentence. The list runs thus,
showing but 47 formally connected sentences in a total of 300.
^"Some Observations on the Sentence-Length in English Prose," Univer-
sity Studies^ Vol. I., No. 2, p. 126.
DE QUINCEY TO HOLMES. MS
Connective. Initial. Interior.
Nor 3
Yet 7
For 3
Therefore . . i
But IS
It is true 2
Also ^ .. I
Thus I
On the other hand I
Too . . I
However . . i
At length \
At last 5 ^
Indeed . . 7
His coherence is impaired at times by one of his methods of
organization. Most of his paragraphs are loose ; but occasion-
ally in the midst of one he will abruptly introduce an intuitive
statement or a generalization, proceeding afterward to resolve
this in redintegrating manner. Sometimes, indeed, the riddle is
left unresolved : Mr. Leslie Stephen's sensibilities were much
jarred by Macaulay's abrupt and unexplained contrast, to the
effect that Boswell was the greatest of fools and the best of biog-
raphers.
This habit of introducing an enigma and then resolving it
step by step gives us a type of paragraph that is pseudo-deduc-
tive yet really periodic. It is a common type in the Essays, In
the History we find a comparatively large number of truly
periodic structures, where the writer begins his paragraph
remotely and proceeds by the natural order of development to a
new conclusion. Whether the order is deductive or inductive, it
often happens that the very first sentence is a summary of the
preceding paragraph, the transition being greatly expanded.'
Macaulay had a very definite sense of paragraph rhythm,
though his movement is too much staccato. He has also a keen
sense of the importance of variety in paragraph-length. Here he
"^ On this point and that of the abrupt introduction of a general statement,
see Minto's admirable analysis of Macaulay's style, Manual^ p. 89 ff.
146 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
is perhaps the most intelligently variable of all our prosaists. He
knows how to relieve the attention by variety, and to drive home
in a short paragraph the details accumulated in a preceding long
one. His percentage of paragraphed sentences is low, but he
does not hesitate to use this device to mark a brief but emphatic
stadium.
The question of constancy in paragraph-length has already
been discussed (pp. 49, 50) with reference to Macaulay, the author
who in stylistic averages is perhaps the most stable of all who
have written English prose.
CARLYLE.
Jean Paul Richter, 1827.
Total paragraphs considered 34
Total words considered 8521
Total sentences considered 270
Average words per paragraph 250.62
Average sentences per paragraph 7.94
Average words per sentence 31 '56
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 5
Essays.
(Gerwig, for 500 periods.)
Per cent, of simple sentences 18
Average predications per sentence 3.12
Per cent, of clauses saved 7.08
Sartor Resartus, 1833-1834.
Total paragraphs considered 1 00
Total words considered 16,690
Total sentences considered 476
Average words per paragraph 166.90
Average sentences per paragraph 4.76
Average words per sentence 35*o6
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 12
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length .... 27-488
French Revolution, 1837.
Total paragraphs considered lOO
Total words considered 16,031
Total sentences considered 671
Average words per paragraph 160.31
DE QUINCEY TO HOLMES. 147
Average sentences per paragraph 6.71
Average words per sentence 23.89
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 3
Per cent, of sentences of less than 15 words 28
Limits of fluctuation in paragraph word-length 24-374
Carlyle's most orderly paragraphs belong to the period of his
life when Goethe's influence over him was freshest and strongest.
For order in the paragraph is due largely to an ascendency of
the intellectual element over the emotional ; and Carlyle's emo-
tions were never so well-tempered — or least ill-tempered — as
when he saw most clearly the mastery that Goethe had of his
own nature." Thus the Life of Schiller is sequent and orderly in
a degree surprising to the reader who has of late fed on the
French Revolution. In this early time Carlyle saw life steadily
and achromatically. But as his egotism waxed strong with his
days, as his impatience of the world increased and his hopes of
reforming it decreased, he became subject to starts of the wildest
incoherence. In such papers as the Latter Day Pamphlets he is
wholly under the influence of his habitually strongest emotions ;
he raves. As Minto says, "Some pages remind us of his vivid
descriptions of chaotic inundations, that hide or sweep away all
guiding posts. Very seldom can we gather from the beginning
of a paragraph what is to be its purport. No attempt is made to
keep a main subject prominent.'""
Minto finds that in Carlyle's writing of history, the case is
very different. "The arrangement is almost the perfection of
clearness. When the bearing of a statement is not apparent, he
is careful to make it explicit. In each paragraph the main subject
is for the most part kept prominent, — his defiance of ordinary
syntax giving him great facilities for a distinct foreground and
background. He begins his paragraphs with some indication of
their contents. Further, he is consecutive, and keeps rigidly to
' Somewhere, (I think in a letter) Carlyle likens Goethe's emotions in their
number and variety to the hues of the landscape, but his intellect to the sun
that irradiates and controls them all.
"^ Manual^ p. 152.
148 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
the point.'* It may be said that this is high praise, and that in
the case of the Revolution nearly every point that Minto makes
should be slightly modified.
The sentence-length of the early essays is moderately long —
in Richter, S^-S^. Between 1827 and 1833 Carlyle was develop-
ing his own peculiar ideas of emphasis ; and the study of German
models increased his sentence, which appears in Sartor as 35.06.
The sentences of Sartor are full of parentheses and involutions.
Of Teufelsdrock's periods the writer himself said, " Perhaps not
more than nine-tenths stand straight on their legs ; the remainder
are in quite angular attitudes ; a few even sprawl out helplessly
on all sides, quite broken-backed and dismembered.** Between
1834 and 1837 Carlyle came under a new influence, the French.
Though his style in the Revolution cannot be called in any sense
Gallic, he had at least profited by his studies ; the sentence of the
Revolution is a third shorter than that of Sartor \ to be exact, it
stands at 23.89. I regret that I have no figures from the Fried-
rich. Sherman, as we have noted in § 4 of Chapter 3, says that
" Carlyle showed no change for worse or better, in respect to
sentence proportions, between the Edinburgh Essays and his
Frederick the Greats In this case the average of Carlyle's sen-
tence has again risen under study of German models ; but the
sentence of the Frederick is surely a different and far better sen-
tence in point of carrying power than the somewhat Johnsonian
sentence of the Essays.
The word-length of Carlyle's paragraph follows just the
course that might be expected. In 1827 it is 250.62. In Sartor
the long period becomes temporarily as prominent a unit as the
paragraph, and the latter sinks to 166.90. The ensuing study of
French reduces the sentence but leaves the paragraph about in
statu quo (160.31). It should be added that the increase in the
impassioned quality of the prose would be another reason why
the early length of the paragraph would decrease. Impassioned
prose cultivates short units; De Quincey's new "impassioned
prose," with its long sentence and paragraph, was merely imagi-
DE QUINCE Y TO HOLMES. 149
native prose. The course of the single-sentence paragraph
corresponds roughly with the movement of the sentence-length,
increasing from 5 per cent, in Richter to 12 per cent, in Sartor,
and in the Revolution dropping to 3 per cent.
Minto's general remarks on the structure of Carlyle's sentence
are just — as that the sentence is an exaggeration of the loose
style, — " consisting, for the most part, of two or three coordinate
statements, eked out by explanatory clauses either in apposition
or in the * nominative absolute' construction." But it is a most
striking fact that, by the use of these devices and an enormous
number of significant phrases and words, Carlyle's later style is
perhaps the weightiest in the language. The amount of sup-
pressed intermediate predication is unprecedented ; and when we
take into account the subjects that Carlyle treated, the number of
facts he was bound as an historian to express, all other intuitive
styles, it seems to me, will appear in comparison with his,
diffuse.
It is a curious fact that Carlyle's coherence seems at first blush
to depend as much on connectives as De Quincey's. The fact is,
however, that Carlyle in his later works conveys several times as
many notions to the sentence as De Quincey does,' and saves
clauses in ways that De Quincey never dreamed of — no, not in
his wildest opium dream after an evening with the "sentences and
periods" of poor Lamb. Carlyle's connectives, again, are far
more vital than De Quincey's, and sometimes represent relations
that De Quincey might have spun into clauses, and that Macaulay
surely would so have treated. The list is from the Revolution,
showing 75 formally connected sentences in 300.
Connectives. Initial. Interior.
So 4 2
But 10
Indeed . . 5
For II
Thus 3 I
However 2 2
' I wish Mr. Gerwig had given us tlie per cent, of clauses saved in the
Revolution. The per cent, in the Essays is only 7.08, while De Quincey's is 5^49.
ISO HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Connective. Initial. Interior.
And 5
Likewise i
Too . . 4
Or I
Nevertheless i 2
Moreover . . i
Neither 2
And yet 2
Nay 5
Also . . 3
Accordingly I I
In like manner — . . i
Lastly I
Then i • 3
On the whole i
At least : . . I
Again . . i
Whereupon i
Carlyle has on the whole a wide variety of means for articula-
tion, notably that of massing significant words at the beginning
and end of sentences. He seldom repeats a word for coherence,
as Macaulay and Arnold and a host of others do ; by ordering
his words he makes repetition unnecessary.
In his historical writing Carlyle is a great master of the law
of proportion, as concerns both the paragraph and the whole
composition. He combines Hume's power of making a para-
graph illustrate a given philosophical idea, and Macaulay's power
of heightening that impression by pictorial means. He moulds
his material, fuses his facts, emphasizes the salient, subordinates
the unimportant. In elaborating large plans, he constantly
reduces his macrocosm to microcosm to be sure of making his
point ; he reiterates his central truth ; he does not disdain numer-
ous formal but living summaries.
In the matter of distribution of emphasis by varying sen-
tence-length he improved steadily. His earliest work shows
about the same percentage of simple sentences as De Quin-
cey's. The Revolution, on the other hand, shows nearly 28
per cent, of sentences under fifteen words, with an unusual
DE QUINCE Y TO HOLMES. 151
tendency toward sentences of less than 8 words. With a per-
centage of short sentences no greater than Burke's, Carlyle man-
ages to distribute his emphasis with masterful effect.
NEWMAN.
Idea of a University, 1854.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Total words considered •. 50,896
Total sentences considered. . '. 1228
Average words per paragraph 254.48
Average sentences per paragraph 6.14
Average words per sentence 41 -44
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 6
Apologia.
(Gerwig, for 500 periods.)
Per cent, of simple sentences 16
Average predications per sentence 2.97
Per cent, of clauses saved 4.50
Newman's paragraphs are the result of the most careful
analysis on the part of their writer. In them unity, usually
philosophical, often complex, is severely observed.
The style is highly redintegrating, in spite of the aggrega-
ting sentence and bookish vocabulary. But it can never be
called impartially redintegrating, as one is sometimes tempted to
call De Quincey's. The most careful selection of thought is
made, and whatever subsidiary matter may have been generated
in the act of composition is sternly repressed in the writing.
In this matter we may compare Newman and De Quincey — both
artistic minds. Both men are interested in the various phases
of the material they use for any given purpose, though of
course Newman less than De Quincey in the sensuous qualities.
But De Quincey cannot express one phase of his interest at a
time ; Newman can.
We find Newman not indeed depending upon connectives
for coherence, but using them freely for increased accuracy.
Thus Sherman found 131 initial connectives in 500 sentences'
^ Analytics^ p. 304.
152 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
— a proportion higher than Coleridge's, indeed perhaps the
highest of our time. Newman's proportion by bulk is all that
could be desired. His distribution of emphasis by sentence-
length is faulty ; but it must be remembered that he is appeal-
ing to the intellect rather than the emotions.
EMERSON.
Divinity School Address -|- American Scholar + Self -Reliance.
Total paragraphs considered 122
Total words considered 24,267
Total sentences considered i,i79
Average words per paragraph 198.91
Average sentences per paragraph 9.66
Average words per sentence 20.58
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 3
Average predications per sentence (Gerwig, \ 2.23
Per cent, of simple sentences for 1438 mi
Per cent, of clauses saved periods.) / 3.01
English Traits.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average sentences per paragraph 6.74
If we hold ourselves, in a definition of unity, to meaning by
the word oneness of subject, we may admit Emerson's paragraphs
to have unity. More than half the time, at least, every sentence
bears on the point concerned.
Sequence in the analytic (/. e. redintegrating) sense he had
none. There is no tracking him. You are conscious that he has
arrived, and from a place worth coming from, for his hands are
full of gems ; but no other man can find out his way, nor can he.
He was always complaining that he had no system ; speaks of his
own "impassable paragraphs, each sentence an infinitely repellent
particle." He has little close ordering of words for coherence,
few inversions, few parallelisms of structure. Out of a desperate
desire to indicate relations, he uses 49 sentence-connectives to
300 periods ; but not always do they catch and hold the true rela-
tion. Here is the list :
DE QUINCE Y 10 HOLMES.
153
Connective.
Thus far
But
Thus
Indeed
And
Finally
Too
Yet
In fine
Or
Hence
On the other part
Then
So
Therefore
For
First
However ,
Initial.
I
I
Interior.
I
I
«
I
3
I
3
I
2
I
How then, without sequence, does our author make himself
clear ? His statements are intuitive ; but we shall find that he
has a curious alternating method of intuitive statement which
amounts to resolution of the main idea. The paragraph con-
tains a half-dozen intuitive sentences, each stating the main idea
from a different point of view ; so that perforce some of the steps
omitted in one statement are supplied in another, if only by the
great variety of associations. Emerson must state the point
intuitively ; but he does so under so many metaphors that he
is sure somewhere to hit your experiences, your quickest road
to'apprehension.
What of his proportion ? There is little of it, whether by
bulk or by sentence-variation. He has 41 per cent, of simple
sentences, and something is sure to be over-emphasized. But in
th^ intuitive manner the lack of proportion is not so keenly felt
as elsewhere.
CHANNING.
Self' Culture^ 1838.
Total paragraphs considered 60
Total words (Slierman) 19,009
154 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Total sentences (Sherman) 750
Average words per paragraph 316.81
Average sentences per paragraph 12.50
Average words per sentence 25.35
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs o
Lenox, Napoleon, Milton.
Average predications per sentence (Gerwig, ( 2.47
Per cent, of simple sentences 2000 -J 34
Per cent, of clauses saved periods.) ( 6.55
Sherman has noted that Channing began the use of the short
sentence at about the same time as Macaulay, and in nearly as
great proportion. But to my mind Channing's emphasis-propor-
tion in the paragraph is more rational, though less brilliant, than
Macaulay 's. Channing knew the worth of the semicolon ; Macau-
lay did not. On the other hand Channing's paragraphs are too
long to be well massed. Nor is the right bulk always assigned
to the main ideas. We can find little fault with Channing's unity,
and little with his coherence. The latter quality depends largely
upon logical redintegration and upon the ordering of words.
Connectives are used but sparingly.
BARTOL.
Radicalism and Genius: Father Taylor.
Total paragraphs (Sherman) 45
Total words (Sherman) 13,385
Total sentences (Sherman) 805
Average words per paragraph 297.44
Average words per sentence 16.63
Average sentences per paragraph 1 7*89
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs o
Radical Problems.
Average predications per sentence (Gerwig, ) 2.10
Per cent, of simple sentences 1500 \ 44
Per cent, of clauses saved periods.) ) 7.60
Radicalism.
Words per paragraph 231.64
Genius: Father Taylor.
Words per paragraph 360.38
DE QUINCE Y TO HOLMES. 155
I have included Dr. Bartol because he is one of the extreme
examples, among reputable writers, of the frequent use of simple
sentences.' His percentage of simple sentences is indeed so high
in proportion to the whole number in the paragraph, that I can
hardly admit that there is any right distribution of emphasis.
Nor is there any proportion by bulk : the writer is as likely to
pour out six sentences on an unimportant point as six on an
important one. Nor have his paragraphs any necessary unitv.
Many are manifestly heterogeneous ; some indeed seem merely
mechanical. Nor, again, can we praise the general coherence
of Bartol's style. Granted that now and then, when he is driv-
ing home a series of coordinate statements bearing on one sub-
ject, he runs smoothly along ; at other times he proceeds by
leaps and in no particular direction, like a boy from tuft to tuft
in a marsh, — forever jumping, but never arriving.
LINCOLN.
Letter, 1863, published Century Magazine, May, 1889.
Total paragraphs 12
Total words 1 659
Total sentences 91
Average words per paragraph 138.25
Average sentences per paragraph 7.60
Average words pier sentence 18.23
I consider a passage from Abraham Lincoln merely to show
the proper use of the very short sentence. The letter is quoted
and praised by Earle, and it forms a good contrast, in point of
method, to the work of the last author considered.
The sentence is a little longer than Bartol's ; but the para-
graph is 138 words as against Bartol's 297. Each of Lincoln's
paragraphs is an organism. Each is knit together by perfect
logical sequence, perfect unity. There is no modulation of
emphasis, for by the nature of the subject there can be none.
The letter is a challenge. Each sentence is meant to go home
^The highest average given by Mr. Gerwig is 58 per cent, of simple sen-
tences — in Mr. J. A Symonds's Greek Poets. It is most extraordinary that
Symonds should also show 10 per cent, of clauses saved.
156 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
like a shot. The whole appeal is to the will, and in cases of this
sort it may be of the very essence of style to eschew the fine
shades of meaning that should exist in an intellectual type of
discourse.
DICKENS.
Old Curiosity Shop.
Total paragraphs considered 300
Total words considered 15,202
Total sentences considered 639
Average words per paragraph S0.67
Average sentences per paragraph 2.13
Average words per sentence 23.78
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 43
Dickens has more than once been criticised for lack of powers
of construction and arrangement. Such criticisms apply often
to his large plans ; but they are not just to his powers of analysis
within the chapter. The unity of his narrative and descriptive
paragraphs is organic and highly picturesque. There are slips at
times, but again, there are whole chapters of the most subtle par-
agraph-unity — of a kind that none but the great novelists can
secure, a kind that no essayist dreams of.
His coherence is the coherence of oral style. There are very
few connectives ; their place is taken by explanatory clauses and
sentences. Occasionally we feel that the style is diffuse, but
obscure never — some bad grammar notwithstanding.
Next to his coherence the best paragraphic quality of Dickens
is his emphasis. This arises largely from his skillful ordering of
words and a keen eye for the point where he should stop his sen-
tence. He rambles when rambling is in order ; but no man can
make a shorter cut. The extent to which he uses the short sen-
tence is not excessive for a novelist : in the Old Curiosity Shop, with
all the conversation included, the percentage of sentences of less
than 15 words is 40 per cent.
The melody of Dickens's prose is equable and flowing, with a
tendency to metre now and then. He has no right feeling for
the paragraph as a rhythmic whole.
DE QUINCE Y TO HOLMES. 157
GEORGE ELIOT.
Daniel Deronda.
Total paragraphs considered 212
Total words considered 16,233
Total sentences considered 725
Average words per paragraph 76.57
Average sentences per paragraph 3.42
Average words per sentence 22.39
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 27
In its averages George Eliot's style approaches that of
Dickens, except that the less elaborate philosophizing of the
latter keeps the word-average of his paragraph down. But the
sentence of the two writers is nearly the same, and George Eliot's
percentage of sentences of less than 15 words is the same, within
3 per cent., as Dickens's. Of the two writers the balance in the
matter of the short sentence is in favor of the woman, who has 43
per cent. Evidently there is here quite as much variability in
the female style as in the masculine.' It should be noted, how-
ever, that George Eliot's short sentences tend to occur together ;
the same is true of her long sentences. In the dialogue the sen-
tence is short ; in the narrative it is long..
We may say that George Eliot's paragraphs have unity,
barring an occasional philosophical digression. We may say
that they show logical coherence, excepting now and then one
wh.ere a remote conclusion is introduced before it is analyzed.
KINGSLEY.
Alton Locke.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average words per paragraph 79- 19
Average sentences per paragraph 3.34
Average words per sentence 23.72
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 39
It is curious that the sentences of Kingsley and Dickens
should differ .but a small fraction of a word and that George
* In view of Mr. Haveloel' Ellis's recent thesis that greater variability in mental
power is shown by the male st x than by the female, it would be an interesting
study to investigate the comparative variability of masculine and feminine styles
158 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
Eliot's should vary but a single word from these two. It will be
remembered that likewise Macaulay coincides, within a word, with
these writers in sentence length. Again, Kingsley and George
Eliot differ but three words in paragraph -length. Evidently the
style of popular narrative and description finds 23 a favorite sen-
tence ; ' while the same style when broken by conversation tends
today to a paragraph of more than 50 and less than 100 words.
1 say today : but in the immediate present many good popular
narrative styles are falling below the 23-mark.
LOWELL.
Carlyle.
Total paragraphs 25
Total words 11,196
Total sentences 356
Average words per paragraph 447*84
Average sentences per paragraph 14- 24
Average sentence-length 31 -45
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 4
Dante.
Total paragraphs considered 50
Average words per paragraph 668.30
Lessing.
Total sentences
Average predications per sentence (Gerwig,
Per cent, of simple sentences for 683
Per cent, of clauses saved periods.)
When we come to read Lowell's noble essay on Dante we are
tempted to acknowledge in his paragraphs a certain colossal
unity ; at a little distance from the charm of the style we dare to
speak of that unity as prolix ; later, we begin to wonder whether
there is any unity at all in a paragraph of, say, 2183 words. It is
hard to make out Lowell's theory of the paragraph. Apparently
he had a most elastic idea of the elasticity of that unit, and felt
^Why this is so remains to be determined. Indeed "^he whole tiuestion
of literary sentence-length must soon be minutely dyj^.dssed from the point of
view of the psychologist and the physiologist, /s well as from that of the
rhetorician.
DE QUINCEY TO HOLMES. 159
that if he looked to a proper alternation of emphasis by sentence-
variation and kept up a general flow of coherence, his paragraphic
duty was done.
. At any rate, it is easy to praise his emphasis, varied by 23 per
cent, of simple sentences and by skillful inversions that put the
main idea first. And we may praise his coherence, depending
as it does upon closeness of logical relation, and eschewing
formal connectives. Sherman found but 59 initial conjunctions
in 500 periods. For all our author's general orderliness, however,
the reader must be well equipped to get the pith of Lowell's finer
prose. His words are meaning-crammed, and there is no pai^s
taken to elaborate in short oral sentences that which a college-bred
man should remember or understand. Once more, we must
admit that Lowell loves a digression, and will take it when the
material he handles is suggestive ; he carries us with him, to be
sure, but we feel that the principle of logical sequence is for the
time set aside for mere association by contiguity.
RUSKIN.
Sesame and Lilies.
Total paragraphs itji
Total words 27,120
Total sentences 814
Average words per paragraph 179.60
Average sentences per paragraph 5.39
Average words per sentence 33 '3 1
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 13
Average predications per sentence (Gerwig, i 3.50
Per cent, of simple sentences for 718 ">. 18
Per cent, of clauses saved periods.) \ 6.63
Ruskin early began to boast of his analytic powers, and not
without reason. His works are divided and subdivided with
great elaboration, the later ones more intelligently but less elabor-
ately than the earlier. He usually employs the words paragraph
and section synonymously, preferring, however, the former term-
The section-mark § he often places before divisions that he calls
paragraphs. He is fond of compound paragraphs, numbering
l6o HISTORY OF TH^ ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
the main paragraph and indicating by indentation the subdivi-
sions. In his first edition of collected works he divided the text
into "paragraphs/* numbering these consecutively through the
volumes.
The paragraphs, even of the Modern Painters, are almost never
heterogeneous, although Ruskin*s later changes in these early
works result in breaking up a few of the sections. In the Modern
Painters the sections are longer than in the Sesame and Lilies and
later works.
The sequence of Ruskin's early work is marred by dislocations
rather than by digressions. Many paragraphs in the Modern
Painters would be bettered much by mere re-arrangement of the
sentences or groups of sentences. In the comments made in the
Brantwood edition (1891), on his early works, Ruskin appreciates
the bad arrangement of some of the paragraphs, and even goes so
far as to declare the "terrible confusion" of others. For his
coherence Ruskin relies in his earlier works much on connect-
ives, but in his later works less and less. He was never afraid
of and, however, and does not hesitate to begin a sentence or a
paragraph with a coordinate conjunction. I doubt if any other
writer uses conjunctions less conventionally and more effectively.
Other means of coherence Ruskin employs with very great variety
and freedom from mannerism : notably parallel structure, veiled
beneath changing phrases of introduction.
Of emphasis-distribution the paragraphs of the Modern Paint-
ers show but little. Ruskin had an early * notion of returning as
far as he could to what he thought the better style of old English
literature, especially to that of his then favorite, in prose, Richard
Hooker.* ' Such a notion was hardly favorable to the develop-
ment of proportion in the paragraph. I have no count for the
Modern Painters, but dare estimate that the percentage of simple
sentences is less than 15 per cent. In Sesame and Lilies, indeed,
it is but 18 per cent. Some of the sentences of the Modern
Painters, particularly in the second volume, were inexcusably
^ Preface to Sesame and Lilies^ collected works, 1871.
DE Q UINCE V ra HOLMES. 1 6 1
long, and destructive to proportion. Thus Ruskin, comment-
ing on the original sentence in which he enunciated the chief
types of unity in art, says : " Yes, I should rather think so [that
the types should be considered separately]; and they ought to have
been named separately, too, and very slowly ; and not upset in a
heap on the floor, as they are in this terrific two-pages entence."*
In another place there is lack of proportion caused by the non-
chalant introduction of an important theory as a subordinate part
of a sentence. The fact does not escape the reviser's eye ; he
says : " This rather astounding paragraph was anciently parted
from the preceding text only by a semicolon. I have fenced it,
at least, with two full stops; for it is in fact the radical theorem
not only of this book, but of all my writings on art.**' The
same critical and artistic discrimination that made these com-
ments possible, largely removes the necessity of any such com-
ments hereafter upon Ruskin's later books. In these, the units of
presentation — both sentence and paragraph — are not long, are
not confused, are not lacking in emphasis. At his best he is one
of the very best paragraph writers of this or any day. No author
would better repay a minute investigation. He has not been
surpassed in the art of concentrating " victoriously intricate "
periods in artistic wholes ; or, to speak more accurately, of
amplifying a given topic in a paragraph whose interior arrange-
ment reveals the most complex proportion.
HERBERT SPENCER.
Philosophy of Style.
Total paragraphs 68
Total words 1 1,983
Total sentences 404
Average words per paragraph 176.22
Average sentences per paragraph 5.94
Average words per sentence 29.66
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 4
Per cent, of sentences of less' than 1 5 words 17
'Brantwood ed., II., 129. 'Brantwood ed., II., 49.
1 62 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
Spencer's averages are interesting as belonging to a scientific
manner, — the manner, moreover, of the author to whom is due
the theory that economy of attention is the governing principle
of style. We find the discourse carefully analyzed into short
paragraphs. These are mostly loose in structure,' a definite con-
clusion being offered in the first sentence and defended in those
following. Evidently Spencer's theory of periodic structure as
the more economical, stops short of the paragraph.
It is interesting, again, to note that, while Spencer's sentences
rather favor the periodic type, they are not long ; like the short
paragraphs, they are for the untechnical reader, if not for the
popular one. The variability in sentence-length is quite as great
as could be expected from a style appealing so little to the
emotions: the percentage of sentences of less than 15 words
is 17 per cent.
The coherence and sequence of Mr. Spencer's prose are
philosophical and correct. The use of connectives is less than
might be supposed. Of the connectives that he does employ
Mr. Bain"" pointed out as characteristic the phrases, Yet another,
Once more, for adding to a cumulation already very much
extended.
MATTHEW ARNOLD.
The Function of Criticism at the Present Time.
Total paragraphs 343
Total words 10,939
Total sentences 324
Average words per paragraph 321.73
Average sentences per paragraph 9.55
Average words per sentence . 33.76
^ Of Spencer's use of the compound type we have spoken, chap. II., § 3.
"" Rhetoric, § 161.
3 In this case, as hitherto, quotations are considered as belonging to the
paragraph in which they are introduced, and not as separate paragraphs, even
when indented. This, of course, only when they are introduced as an integral
part of the paragraph. Arnold usually indicates such a relation by preceding
he (Quotation with the colon and dash (: — ).
1/ :-,
DE QUINCEY TO HOLMES. " ' I03
Literary Influence of Academies.
Total paragraphs 37
Total words 9*883
Total sentences 281
Average words per paragraph 267.10
Average sentences per paragraph 7.58
Average words per sentence 35' 1 7
Function of Criticism-\- Literary Influence.
Total paragraphs : 7 1
Total words ,. 20,822
Total sentences 605
Average words per paragraph 293.26
Average sentences per paragraph 8.52
Average words per sentence 34-41
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 5
Culture and Anarchy.
Total paragraphs considered 100
Average sentences per paragraph 6.68
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 4
Essays, 500 periods.
(Gerwig, for 500 periods.)
Average predications per sentence 2.77
Per cent, of simple sentences 20
Per cent, of clauses saved 4.5 '
It is a pleasant task to re-read the Essays in Criticism to see
whether the measure and proportion that Arnold found his chief
delight in praising extends in his own prose to the organization
of the paragraph. The result of our reading is, on the whole,
satisfactory. Arnold's paragraphs, while they have not the very
highest variety in unity, do have admirable measure and propor-
tion.
The paragraph is usually loose, with an introductory sentence
of transition. A large proportion are deductive : Arnold loved
to regard the paragraph as a means of illustrating a general rule
— he was not particular to advance a large body of particulars
and base an induction upon these. We may quote on this point
his own words about another matter : " Here, as everywhere else,
\
1 64 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH
the rule, the idea, if true, commends itself to the judicious, and
then the examples make it clearer still to them. This is the real
use of examples, and this alone is the purpose which I have
meant mine to serve." '
The coherence of Arnold's paragraphs is well-nigh perfect in
its way. It arises primarily from an oral structure — a close
logical method, redintegrating in idea, slightly aggregating in
sentence. It is true that Sherman found 137 formally connected
sentences in a total of 500 ; though some of Arnold's initial con-
nectives are deliberately superfluous, used to give conversational
tone — I refer to such words as " well," "now." But the fact is
that Arnold uses not only a goodly number of conjunctions, but
also a very great variety of transitional phrases and clauses. He
is always aiming at the relations of things : he would rather paint
no picture at all than one without the significant half-tones, the
shadings that by their cool gradations make apparent the truth
of the landscape. He will not even trust you to remember, under
the m6re stimulus of a pronominal word, exactly what a given
substantive meant; he must explicitly repeat the substantive.
Then another phase of his orderly, redintegrating method should
be mentioned : I remember no other English prosaist who has so
mastered the art of placing words in a way to secure sentence
emphasis without hurting either the just order of the thought,
the just proportion of the thought, or the just idiom of the
language. To be sure, he is often reduced to the device of gentle
exclamation ; but with what accuracy he puts the important words
first and last in the sentence ! yet with how few breaks between
propositions, how little exaggeration of the inconsequential, how
little violence of normal English structure ! He is not, however,
quite successful in so arranging the parts of the paragraph that
the chief things shall be seen first. One other method of coher-
ence Arnold affects, that of parallel construction. Few writers
use it more extensively. Others, as De Quincey, keep the
reader less aware of its presence ; still others, as Macaulay,
' Literary Influence of Academies^ p. 77.
DE QUINCEY TO HOLMES. 165
thrust it more prominently before the reader's eye. Arnold
usually exhibits with it his habit of repeating words for explicit-
ness of reference.
The Hellenists will have it that the finest measure and pro-
portion are not visible, when they really exist, except on the
closest scrutiny. Arnold's distribution of emphasis by sentence-
length may perhaps claim some such praise in this respect as
would be given to a good picture. For one, I should not guess
before counting that Arnold writes 20 per cent, of simple sen-
tences. His brief propositions do not come in series : the
nature of his subjects and of his method never makes them
superfluously emphatic and conspicuous ; and so one is likely, in
a general reading, to underestimate their number and impor-
tance. But they are used with the greatest discretion. Again, it
should be noticed that Arnold is hardly surpassed in the art of
varying emphasis within the sentence itself. Here, long periodic
'clauses are succeeded by short loose ones ; or, a long period may
consist of a half-dozen loose propositions that a less discrimina-
ting man would have signalized by full stops.
Style, WALTER PATER.
Total paragraphs 37
Total words 8450
Total sentences 219
Average words per paragraph 228.37
Average sentences per paragraph 5.97
Average words per sentence 38.54
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs i
Appreciations, 500 periods.
(Gerwig, for 500 periods.)
Average predications per sentence 2.74
Per cent, of simple sentences 26
Per cent, of clauses saved I3'74
In Ruskin, Newman, and certain other writers, there is to
be noted a decided reaction toward the long sentence. This
movement reaches in Mr. Walter Pater perhaps the limit at which
the paragraph and the long period can be reconciled. Mr. Pater
1 66 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
is conscious of the tendency of his style towards complexity and
minute qualification, and he therefore conscientiously keeps to the
unity of the paragraph. What is even more noticeable, he uses
a large percentage of appositional clauses and phrases, that*
while they have partly the effect of parentheses, yet avoid the
multiplication of predications and connectives. It is a weighty
style, a correct style, a beautiful style in its fitting of word
to notion ; but it has a wholly different order of procedure from
that introduced by Macaulay.
The coherence, always present, but seen by the reader at some
expense to his attention, depends equally upon order of words
and upon connectives ; very little indeed upon parallel structure.
Of 300 sentences in the Appreciations^ 66 are formally connected.
The proportion of ands is startling. Thus :
Connective. Initial. Interior.
On the other hand I i
Then .... . . 4
And 21
Yet 3
So 2
For 7
Further . . i
Again i 2
Hence i
Well 3
But 12
Still 2 I
So far I
Too . . 2
Also . . 2
At least I
Indeed . . i
Now I
Thus 2
The percentage of simple sentences is such that the distri-
bution of emphasis is provided for mechanically, and a tribute
should be paid to the often exquisite precision with which
the right clause is made to bear the paragraph stress.
DE QUI NCR Y TO HOLMES. 167
J. R. GREEN.
History of the English People.
Total paragraphs considered 200
Average sentence-length for 200 sentences 29.04
Average words per paragraph c. 456.75
Average sentences per paragraph 15.75
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs o
I have included some statistics for the style of Mr. J. R.
Green, to illustrate one of the newer types of historical writing.
The sentence is much longer than Macaulay's, the paragraph
very much longer than Macaulay's. The single-sentence para-
graph is abolished. The variety that Macaulay secured by vary-
ing the length of the paragraph and its structure is lacking
here. The paragraphs are not well massed. The element of
variety being made little of, an attempt is made to supply its
place with that of intensity and weight. There are no waste sen-
tences. The short sentences are sententious, and the long ones,
while admirable in accuracy, are sometimes a little heavy. The
coherence is good, but it is the coherence of severe method,
and depends neither on connectives nor on transitional clauses.
After all, it is a noble style, though not an easy one.
BARRETT WENDELL.
Paragraphs (chap, iv., in English Composition^.
Total paragraphs considered 55
Total words considered 9363
Total sentences considered 365
Average words per paragraph 170.23^
Average sentences per paragraph 6.63
Average words per sentence 25.65
Per cent, of single-sentence paragraphs 5
We have spoken of Professor Wendell as a recent theorizer
on the paragraph. Since he has treated the subject in a literary
way, shunning the pedantry of technicalities, and since he mani-
festly aims at producing superior massing and ^emphasis, let us
see what numerical results his practice gives. The chapter on
the paragraph yields a sentence of 25. Nearly 24 per cent, of all
\
1 68 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
the sentences fall beneath the length of 15 words. The para-
graph reaches but 170 words. Evidently the theory of Mass,
when put in practice, tends toward keeping the paragraph to
very moderate length. To mass well a long paragraph is a most
difficult task.
HOLMES.
The style of Dr. Holmes is typical of certain popular writing,
which, though not properly intuitive, omits formal predication as
often as possible, and since it is not concerned with the finer
restrictions of thought, omits connectives with the greatest free-
dom. Holmes delights in appositive phrases and clauses, and
in verbless sentences. In 500 periods Sherman found but 5
initial connectives. My own count, from 300 sentences in the
Autocrat, Y^^^^ a percentage very much higher — 27 initial con-
nectives in 300 periods. The list runs thus :
Connective. Initial. Interior.
But 8
However ' . . i
And 4
So I I
First, secondly 4
Or 3
Thus 2
Yet I
On the contrary i
In short i
Once more . . i
• •
On the whole i
Too . . I
At length i
CHAPTER IX.
THE PROSE PARAGRAPH: SUMMARY.
It is the object of this chapter, not to state in essay form,
woven together of all the judgments hitherto expressed, a com-
plete view of the history of the prose paragraph, but to arrange
in a somewhat mechanical way the more important of the theses
that I propose.
CHAPTER I.
1. (Page 12.) The modern re fere nee -mark, % (sixth in the
printer's list of reference-marks) is probably descended, not, as
held by Mr. Maunde Thompson, from the original Greek gamnia,
but from the Latin mark P.
2. (Page 15.) The modern so-called section-mark, §, is prob-
ably derived, not from the original gamma, as held by Blass, but
from the Latin P ; surely not from the combination of two ff,
as taught by certain text-books. The type of this mark is prob-
ably of Italian origin, 1467-1473.
3. (Page 14.) Indentation is probably not due, as the popular
bibliophilic tradition asserts, to the omission of printed capitals
to permit the insertion of rubricated ones, but to the example of
those manuscripts where it is used without reference to rubrica-
tion.
CHAPTER II.
4. (Page 2 2ff.) While, for purposes of pedagogy, the writing
of single-sentence paragraphs should largely be discouraged, in
view of the natural tendency of students toward impartial
analysis, it is nevertheless not correct to say, with Earle, "that
the term paragraph can hardly be applied to anything short of
three sentences, though rarely a complete and satisfactory effect
is produced by two." For, although there has been a pretty
steady decrease, in 300 years, in the use of the paragraphed
169
^i
170 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
sentence, most of the eminent writers of English prose have not
hesitated to use this device, not merely to mark a transition but
to signalize a stadium.
5. (P. 3off.) The only really new phases of rhetorical
theory since Bain's " six rules," are Wendell's theory of Mass,
and Scott and Denney's theory of Proportion. Wendell's theory
of Mass is : "A paragraph whose unity can be demonstrated by
summarizing its substance in a sentence whose subject shall be a
summary of its opening sentence, and whose predicate shall be a
summary of its closing sentence, is theoretically well massed."
Scott and Denney's theory of proportion is perhaps sufficiently
implied in the following sentence : " Statements which standing
alone would properly be independent sentences, are frequently
united into one sentence when they become part of a paragraph."
The theory implies also the converse of this statement.
6. (P. 30-32, 167.) (a) Wendell's theory of Mass is not
applicable to any large proportion of existing paragraphs, and is
difficult of application except in short paragraphs. Scott and
Denney's theory of Proportion is true of those writers who have
a conception of the paragraph as an organic whole, — Burke,
Macaulay, Arnold, for example. The principle is so strongly
operative in the best prose of today that we may probably go so
far as to say : in general it is true that in the best modern para-
graphs the distance between periods is inversely as the emphasis
of each included proposition. {B) It will follow as a corollary
from the principle last enunciated, that the tendency (noted by
Professor Sherman) of English prose to reduce the sentence to
Procrustean regularity of length, cannot indefinitely persist.
CHAPTER III.
7. (P. 37ff.) In the history of English prose there has
been, for relatively the same kinds of discourse, no pronounced
increase or decrease of the average total number of words per
paragraph.
8. (P. 42.) The paragraph of today contains more than
twice as many sentences as did that of Ascham's day. Indeed, if
SUMMARY. 171
we accept Macaulay's England as a present-day norm, the past
increase in sentences per paragraph in three hundred years has
been far more than one hundred per cent.
9. (P. 35ff.) In a list of 73 representative English prosaists,
the average word-length of the paragraph falls in the case of each
of 52 authors between the limits of 100 words and 300 words.
Of these 52 authors, 25 show each an average falling between the
limits of 200 words and 300 words ; while 27 show each an average
falling between the limits of 100 and 200 words. Of these two
groups it would be unwarrantable to say that either is superior to
the other in paragraph structure. The first includes many
authors who are superior in delicacy and variety of proportion —
Arnold, Newman, Pater ; the second includes many who are
superior in terse emphasis — Bolingbroke, Swift, Carlyle, Lamb.
But one of the greatest masters of terse emphasis, Macaulay,
belongs in the first group, and one of the greatest masters of
delicate and varied proportion, Ruskin, belongs in the second.
Most of the writers whose average rises above 300 words are poor
paragraphers, De Quincey and Channing being exceptions.
Most of those whose average falls below 100 words are writers in
whom dialogue predominates, Fuller, Defoe, and Paley being
exceptions.
10. (P. 35ff.) In a list of 71 representative English pro-
saists, 5 show an average number of less than 2 sentences to the
paragraph ; i t show an average of more than 2 and less than 3
sentences ; 1 1 show an average of more than 3 and less than 4
6 show an average of more than 4 and less than 5
9 show an average of more than 5 and less than 6
10 show an average of more than 6 and less than 7
6 show an average of more than 7 and less than 8
3 show an average of more than 8 and less than 9 ;
4 show an average of more than 9 and less than 10 ; one averages
10 + ; two average 12 + J one averages 14 +; one 15 +, one
17 +. The favorite numbers of sentences are therefore 2 -|- and
3 +, each of which occurs 11 times. Then, in order of frequency,
sentences
sentences
sentences
sentences
sentences
172 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH
come 6+,5+, 4+, and 7 +» 9+» 8 +, 12 +, 14+, and 15 +
and 17 +. Dialogue-writing affects this list but very little. Of
the romancers, Irving shows the highest average of sentences, 4.12.
11. (P. 43.) There has been from the earliest days of our
prose a unit of invention much larger than the modern sentence,
and always separated, in the mind of the writer, from the sen-
tence-unit, of whatever length. In other words English writers
have thought roughly in long stages before they have analyzed
such stages into smaller steps.
12. (P. 44ff.) The paragraph as we know it comes into some^
thing like settled shape in Sir William Temple. It was the
product of perhaps fiv^ chief influences. First, the tradition,
derived from the authors and scribes of the Middle Ages, that the
paragraph -mark distinguishes a stadium of thought. Second, the
Latin influence, which was rather towards disregarding the para-
graph as the sign of anything but emphasis — the emphasis-tradi-
tion being also of mediaeval origin ; the typical writers of the
Latin influence are Hooker and Milton. Third, the natural
genius of the Anglo-Saxon structure, favorable to the paragraph.
Fourth, the beginnings of popular writing — of what may be called
the oral style, or consideration for a relatively uncultivated audi-
ence. Fifth, the study of French prose, in this respect a late
influence, allied in its results with the third and fourth influences.
The course taken by the conflict of the second principle with
the rest, resulting in the intermediate unit of the amorphous par-
agraphed sentence, is summarized, pp. 44-47.
13. (P. 47ff.) Throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries, there is, in authors of regular methods, such as Hume
and Macaulay, a perceptible but not a strong tendency towards
reducing the average length of the paragraph to approximate
constancy, in successive large groups of paragraphs. The author
in whom the tendency is most pronounced is Macaulay. Here the
tendency is so strong as to give a difference of only six words in
the average paragraph word-length of the first and second vol-
umes of the History of England.
i*
SUMMARY. 173
CHAPTER IV.
14. (P. 52ff.) {a) The recent investigations of Professor L.
A. Sherman, in the development of the short sentence in English
prose, are of much importance in their bearing upon the history
of paragraph structure ; but by referring to the short sentence as
** analytic," and again, in following the course of the development,
by referring to the style of such intuitive (or synthetic) authors
as Emerson as "analytic," the writer leads us into temporary con-
fusion. From this it seems best, for the purposes of our discus-
sion, to escape by the invention of certain new terms, as :
segregating, applied to a style where the sentence of maximum
occurrence is short, say, twenty words or less ; aggregating, to
a style where the favorite sentence is long ; redintegrating, where
the method of procedure is psychologically analytic; intuitive,
where the method is psychologically synthetic — omitting the
steps of approach, the intermediate predications, {b) (p. 57ff.)
The value of Professor Sherman's conclusions regarding the *^r^/'
style are slightly impaired for us by the confused terminology
mentioned in (12). The consequence of his theory concerning
the decrease of predication is the application of the term *orar
alike to styles redintegrating and intuitive. It seems better to
limit the term *oral style' to one in which the short sentence is
employed, but the thought is psychologically redintegrating.
15. {a) The oral style as we now understand it — produced by
the expression of redintegrating thought in a segregating sentence
— is the style most favorable to the paragraph structure, {b)
We may indeed almost define the oral style in terms of the para-
graph. Thus : From the moment of the establishment of unity,
in the development of the English paragraph, the oral sentence-
sense means decreasing the number of predications in the period
and increasing the number of propositions in the paragraph, in
proportion to the author's conception of his reader's power of
interpretation.
16. (P. 63ff.) The articulation of clauses without connectives
is a help to the coherence of the paragraph in only one of two
174 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
cases : (a) where the style is impassioned ; (B) where the place of
connectives is supplied by transitional phrases or clauses. There-
ore it is not likely that the decrease in the use of connectives — a
decrease explained by Professor Sherman in his Analytics of Lit-
erature, chapter 26, — will continue indefinitely in prose that
expresses proportioned and modulated thought.
CHAPTER V.
17. (P. 67.) Though the paragraph plays no structural
part in Anglo-Saxon, it is not rash to say that the paragraphs
indicated by the rubricator have, in general, unity of subject, the
exceptions being due to causes explained in (18).
18. (P. 66.) There were four distinct uses of the paragraph-
mark, in Anglo-Saxon prose : {a) to mark a logical section ; (f)
to note any emphatic point ; {c) to distinguish formally sacred
names ; (d) to ornament and distinguish titles, colophons, etc.
19. (P. 7off.) {a) The Anglo-Saxon prose sentence corre-
sponds in length roughly with the sentence of the nineteenth
century. (I?) The Anglo-Saxon prose sentence increases slowly
in length, and when it becomes the Middle-English sentence,
reaches, under Latin influence, a length nearly as great as that
attained by the latinized sentence of Jacobean times.
20. No English writer before Tyndale has any sense of the
paragraph as a subject of internal arrangement.
CHAPTER VI.
21. (P. 75ff.) In Tyndale we find the earliest writer who
can be said to be in any sense a good paragrapher.
22. The most important men after * Tyndale in the period
from Tyndale to Temple, are Bacon, Hobbes, Browne, and Fuller,
in respect of unity ; Lord Herbert, Burton, and Bunyan, in
distribution of emphasis by variability of sentence-length ; Bur-
ton in the matter of coherence without formal connectives;
Fuller in the establishment of the deductive paragraph order.
CHAPTERS VII-IX.
23. The unity of the paragraph becomes nearly unimpeacha-
SUMMARY, 175
ble in such men as Addison, Shaftesbury, Bolingbroke, Johnson,
Hume, Burke. Only the best paragraphers of the nineteenth
century, Macaulay, for example, surpass these authors in this
respect.
24. Proportion in the paragraph pretty steadily increases
from Temple to Arnold, both in the way of assigning due bulk
to the amplification of important ideas, and in the way of dis-
tributing emphasis by varying sentence-length. The following
list will illustrate the latter point, by showing in the first column
the percentage of each author in the use of sentences of less than
fifteen words, in the second the average sentence-length. In
starred authors the percentage ' of simple sentences, usually one
or two points higher than the per cent, of sentences under fif-
teen words, is substituted in the first column.
Per cent, of
sentences of less
than 15 words.
Sentences
considered.
Sentence -
length.
Sentences
considered
•
Temple
2
704
53.40
538
* Dryden -
- 6
521
38.44
1300
Locke -
8
814
49.80
814
Defoe
- 8
360
38.68
360
* Swift -
13
50(0
40.00
II71
* Addison -
- 12
500
38.58
898
* Shaftesbury -
28
650
26.80
578
* Bolingbroke -
- 14
977
34.86
981
Johnson
9
218
38.15
218
* Hume
- 12
500
39.81
1200
* Goldsmith -
18
500
26.94
868
Burke -
- 29
916
26.09
916
Gibbon
10
1562
31.21
1562
Paley
- 17
392
37.68
392
Scott -
14
1224
32.14
1224
* Coleridge
- 19
500
37.60
777
Jeffrey -
6
545
50.65
545
Lamb
- . 41
529
27.19
529
Landor
22
696
25.43
696
Irving
^ 24
532
26.73
532
* De Quincey
14
500
38.81
815
* Macaulay
- 34
40,000
23.43
41,579
^ Mr. Gerwig's figures.
176 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH.
Sentences
considered.
Sentence -
Sentences
length.
considered.
31.56
270
41.44
1228
20.58
II79
25.35
750
16.63
805
31.45
356
33.31
814
34.41
605
38.54
219
Per cent, of
sentences of less
than 15 words.
* Carlyle - - - 18 500
* Newman - - - - 16 500
* Emerson - - - 41 1438
* Channing - - - 34 2000
* Bartol - - - 44 1500
* Lowell - - - - 23 683
* Ruskin ... 18 718
* Arnold - - - - 20 500
* Pater - - - 26 500
25. Coherence by parallel construction of sentences, begin-
ning in crude form in the paragraphs of the sixteenth century
Euphuists — Lyly> Nash, Lodge, and their fellows — is reduced
to a flexible and strong principle in Temple, Swift, Shaftesbury,
Bolingbroke, Johnson, Hume, Gibbon, and Burke. It is weak in
Dryden, Locke, Defoe, Sterne, Goldsmith, Paley. In the next
century it continues weak in Scott, Coleridge, Jeffrey, Irving,
Emerson, Carlyle ; reviving in De Quincey, Macaulay, Arnold.
It is neglected by many popular writers of the present day.
26. Coherence secured by so ordering words in the sentence
that the mind shall pass from one sentence to another without
check, is an art little observed in the sixteenth century. In the
seventeenth it is perhaps strongest in Fuller and Burton. In the
eighteenth century this principle is tolerably strong in Temple,
Defoe, Shaftesbury, Bolingbroke,, Fielding, Sterne, Goldsmith. It
is very strong in Swift and Burke. It is relatively weak in John-
son, Gibbon. In the nineteenth century the principle is rela-
tively active in Lamb, Macaulay, Newman, and is at its best in
Carlyle, for one type, and in Arnold, for another.
27. Coherence secured by the use of connectives is in most
active force in the earliest periods of our prose. From the six-
teenth century till the opening of the nineteenth it declines,
reaching its ebb in the balanced sentences of Gibbon. At the
beginning of the nineteenth century the principle became strongly
operative in the reactionary prose of Coleridge, but has again
declined. Today there are two tendencies, one continuing the
SUMMARY. 177
decline, the other emphatically but intelligently reacting. The
popular prose of the last twenty years tends to drop sentence-
connectives. Another stream of writing, represented by the
classical prose of Arnold, uses connectives freely but vitally. The
present discussion holds that the dropping of inter- sentential
connectives cannot successfully be accomplished without danger
to one essential prose merit — the merit of reproducing the restric-
tions and modulations which must characterize good prose
of the intellectual type. The table on page 178 presents in outline
the progress of the usage regarding inter-sentential connectives.
The table shows, certain interesting facts respecting the rela-
tive use of different conjunctions by different authors. Walton
uses the highest number of ands. Swift, Johnson, Macaulay use no
ands at all ; Gibbon uses but one. Pater curiously exhibits more
ands than any other man since Walton ; but his use of them is
not formal merely. Coleridge registers the highest percentage
of buts since Spenser, while De Quincey practically eschews this
word and exhibits about as large a number of interior howevers
as Coleridge of initial buts. Initial therefore is little used since
Ascham, and interior therefore not extensively — Coleridge head-
ing the list with eleven.
28. The favorite type of paragraph in the history of our prose
has been the loose type, although certain writers, as Butler in the
eighteenth and Macaulay in the nineteenth, have shown some
facility in the periodic type.
29. There has been, during the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries, a general tendency to make the topic-sentence of the
paragraph short, but not to reduce it to laconic brevity.
30. The better paragraphs of the nineteenth century are far
more organic, far more highly organized, than the better ones of
the eighteenth.
31. The paragraph structure is, in proportion to the com-
plcjxity and size of the thought conveyed, more economical of
attention than the long periodic sentence ; and the rise of the
paragraph structure is in no small degree due to this fact.
TABLE OF CONNECTIVES.
The Risl column under each author shows Ihe number of initi
second column, the number of connectives that, though standinf; within the
clauses. The basis of romf illation in each author is
BIBLIOGRAPHY, 1 7 9
BIBLIOGRAPHY.
Note. — Most of the works used in preparing Chapter I., having been
given at the end of that chapter to facilitate the reading of the cut, are not here
repeated.
I.
CRITICAL WORKS QUOTED.
Angus, Joseph : Handbook of the English Tongue, London.
Aristotle: Rhetoric ^ translated by J. E. C. Welldon. London, 1886.
Arnold, Matthew: Essays in Criticism, London, 1893.
Bain, Alexander : English Composition and Rhetoric, New York,
1869.
Blades, William : Life and Typography of William Caxton, Lon-
don, 1861-1863.
Brandl, Alois : Life of Coleridge^ translated by Lady Eastlake. Lon-
don, 1887.
Carpenter, G. R. : Exercises in Rhetoric and Composition (Advanced
Course). Boston, 1893.
Colvin, Sidney : Landor (English Men of Letters). New York.
De Quincey, Thomas: WorkSy ed. Masson. Edinburgh, 1889.
Earle, John: English Prose. New York, 1890.
Genung, J. F. : The Practical Elements of Rhetoric, Boston, 1892.
Gerwig, G. W. : On the Decrease of Predication and of Sentence
Weight in English Prose. University StudieSy^ published by the Univer-
sity of Nebraska, Vol. II., No. i.
Gosse, Edmund : History of Eighteenth Century Literature, Lon-
don, 1891.
Hazlitt, William : Essays^ ed. Carr. London.
Hill. A. S. : Principles of Rhetoric. New York, 1883.
' Foundations of Rhetoric , New York, 1893.
Hill, D. J. : Elements of Rhetoric, New York.
Hunt, T. W. : The Principles of Written Discourse, New York,
1891.
Hunt, T. W. : English Prose and Prose Writers. New York, 1891.
Landor, W. S. : Works, London, 1876.
Lowell, J. R. : Latest Literary Essays, Boston, 1892.
McElroy, J. G. R. : The Structure of English Prose, New York,
1887.
Minto, William : Manual of English Prose, Boston, 1892.
l8o HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
Muller, Ivan yon : Handbuch der Klassischen Alterthutnswissenschaft,
Miinchen, 1892.
Nichol, John: Primer of English Composition. London, 1891.
Quack enbos, G. P. : Course of Composition and Rhetoric, New York.
Roberts, E. S. : An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy, Cambridge
University Press, 1887.
Ruskin, John : Works^ Brantwood ed. London and New York, 1891.
Saintsbury, George : History of Elizabethan Literature, London,
1891.
Specimens of English Prose, London, 1885.
Scott, F.N. and Denney, J. V. : Paragraph- Writing, Boston, 1893.
Sherman, L. A.: Analytics of Literature, Boston, 1893.
Some Observations on the Sentence- Length in English
Prose, University Studies^ published by the University of Nebraska,
Vol. L, No. 2.
On Certain Facts and Principles in the Development of Form
in Literature, University Studies^ Vol. L, No. 4.
Sidney, Sir Philip: Defense of Poetry , Arber Reprint, 1868.
The SamCt ed. Cook. Boston, 1 890.
The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia, Facsimile of editio
PrincepSt ed. Sommer. London, 1891.
Stephen, Leslie: Hours in a Library, ist Series, London, 1874.
3d Series, London, 1879.
Taine, H. A. : Histoire de la Littirature Anglaise, Paris, 1887.
Thompson, E. Maunde : Handbook of Greek and Latin Palceography,
London, 1893.
Trevelyan, G. O. : Life and Letters of Macaulay, London, 1886.
Wattenbach, Wilhelm : Anleitung zur Lateinischen Palceographie,
Leipzig, 1886.
IL
Editions Employed in the Study of the Prose Paragraph.
Addison, Joseph : Works, London, 1 72 1 .
^Ifric: Selected Homilies, Ed. Sweet. Oxford, 1885.
Alfred: Orosius, E. E. T. S. 1879. Ed. Sweet.
Ancren Riwle. Camden Society, Ed. Morton. London, 1853.
Arnold, Matthew: Works. London, 1891..
Ascham, Roger: Toxophilus, Arber reprint, 1868.
Scholemaster, Arber reprint, 1870.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. i8i
Bacon, Francis: Advancement of Learning, Oxford, 1633.
The Same, ed. Aldis Wright. Oxford, 1891.
Bartol, C. A. : Radical Problems, Boston, 1874.
Bt^2i'. Ecclesiastical History, E. E. T. S. 45. Ed. Miller.
Bentley, Richard : Epistles of Phalaris, 2nd ed. London, 1699.
Blair, Hugh: Lectures on Rhetoric, London, 18 19.
Browne, Sir Thomas : Works, Bohn ed. London, 1852.
Bunyan, John : The Pilgrim's Progress, Facsimile of editio princeps,
London : Elliot Stock.
Burke, Edmund : Works, Boston, 1889.
Burton, Robert : Anatomy of Melancholy, London, 1676.
Butler, Joseph : Works, Edinburgh, 1804.
Carlyle, Thomas : Sartor Resartus, London : Chapman & Hall.
French Revolution, London, 1837.
Essays, Boston, 1881.
Channing, W. E. : Works, Boston, 1886.
Chaucer, Geoffrey : Prose Works, E. E. T. S. Extra Series, v. and
xvi. Ed. Morris and Skeat.
Coleridge, S. T. : The Friend, Bohn ed. London, 1867.
1
Cooper, Anthony: Second Earl of Shaftesbury: Characteristics,
London, 1757.
Cowley, Abraham : Essays. London, 1680.
Essays. Ed. Lumby. Cambridge, 1887.
Cranmer, Thomas : Works. Parker Society. Ed. Cox, from ed.
of 1580.
Defoe, Daniel : Robinson Crusoe. Facsimile of editio princeps.
London, 1883.
Defoe, Daniel : Essay on Projects. Ed. H. Morley. London.
De Quincey, Thomas': Opium Eater. Boston, 185 1.
Works. Boston, 1874.
Dickens, Charles : Works. New York, 188 1.
Dryden, John : On Satire, in Translation of Juvenal. London, 1726.
Works. Ed. Scott, Saintsbury. Edinburgh, 1882.
Eliot, Sir John : Works. Ed. Grosart (from MS.), 1879.
Eliot, George : Daniel Deronda. New York.
Emerson, R. W. : Miscellanies. Boston, 1883.
Fabyan, Robert : Concordance of Histories. Ed. Ellis. London,
1811.
Fielding,- Henry : Tofn Jones. Ed. L. Stephen. London, 1882.
1 82 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAGRAPH,
Fuller, Thomas : Worthies of England, Editio princeps, London,
1662.
Gibbon, Edward: History of the Roman Empire, Oxford, 1827.
Goldsmith, Oliver : Vicar of Wakefield, Ed. Gibbs. London, 188$.
Gosson, Stephen : School of Abuse. Arber reprint, 1868.
Green, J. R. : History of the English People, New York, 1885.
Greene, Robert: Works, ed. Grosart (Huth Library, 1881-86).
Greville, Fulke, Lord Brooke: Life of Sidney, Ed. Grosart, 1870.
Herbert, Edward, Lord : Autobiography, Ed. Dircks. London,
1888.
Hobbes, Thomas: Leviathan, Ed. Molesworth. London, 1839.
Holinshed, Ralph : Chronicles, London, 1574.
Hooker, Richard : Ecclesiastical Polity. London, 1639 (?)
Howell, James ; England's Tears for the Present Wars, Editio
princeps J 1644.
Hume, David : History of England, Oxford, 1826.
Hyde, Edward, Lord Clarendon : History of the Great Rebellion,
Oxford, 1 712.
Irving, Washington: Sketch Book. New York, 1891.
Jeffrey, Francis: Contributions to the Edinburgh Review, New
York, 1879.
Johnson, Samuel : Works. Oxford, 1825.
Jonson, Benjamin : Timber, or Discoveries made upon Men and
Matter, Ed. Schelling. Boston, 1892.
Kingsley, Charles: Alton Locke, New York, 1887.
Lamb, Charles: Essays of Elia. Ed. Rhys. London, 1890.
Landor, W. S.: Imaginary Conversations. Boston, 1876.
Latimer, Hugh: Seven Sermons, Arber reprint, 1869.
Lincoln, Abraham : Letter. Century Magazine, May, 1 889.
Locke, John : Essay on Human Understanding. Oxford, 1824.
Lowell, J. R.: Among my Books. Boston, 1881.
Lyly, John : Euphues, Arber reprint, 1868.
Macaulay, T. B.: History of England, London, 1879.
Essays, New York.
Dr, fohnson, Encyc. Brit., 8th ed.
Mandeville, John : Voiage and Travaile. Ed. Halliwell. London,
1839.
Michel of Northgate : Ayenbite of Inwyt, E. E. T. S. 23. Ed. Morris.
Milton, John: Areopagitica, Arber reprint, 1868.
BIBLIOGRAPHY, 183
Xash, Thos.: Works, Huth Library, ed. Grosart, 1883-4.
Newman, Cardinal J. H.: Idea of a University. London, 1891.
Overbury, Sir Thomas : Characters,
Pater, Walter: Appreciations, with An Essay on Style, London,
1890.
Plato and Platonism. London, 1893.
Paley, William : Moral and Political Philosophy, Philadelphia,
1831.
Pecock, Reginald : The Repressour of Overmuch Blaming of the
Clergy, Ed. Churchill Babington. London, i860.
Puttenham, George : The Arte of English Poesie, Arber reprint,
1869.
Richardson, Samuel: Pamela. Ed. L. Stephen. London, 1883.
Ruskin, John: Sesame and Lilies, London, 1891.
St. John, Henry, Viscount Bolingbroke : Letter to Sir William
Wyndham, London, 1777.
Scott, Sir Walter : Ivanhoe, Edinburgh, 1871.
Selden, John : Table Talk, Ed. H. Morley. London.
Sidney, Sir Philip : Arcadia. Facsimile of original quarto. Ed.
Sommer. London, 1891.
Defense of Poesy, Arber reprint, 1868.
Spencer, Herbert: Philosophy of Style, Ed. Scott. Boston, 1892.
Spenser, Edmund : View of the Present State of Ireland, Ed. Gro-
sart, 1882.
Sterne, Laurence: A Sentimental Journey, London, 1783.
Stow, John : Chronicle, London, 1575.
Swift, Jonathan : A Tale of a Tub and Battle of the Books, Editio
princeps, London, 1704.
Gulliver's Travels, Ed. Sheridan and Nichols. London,
1803.
Taylor, Jeremy : The Liberty of Prophesying. Ed. Heber. London,
1828.
Temple, Sir William : Works, London, 18 14.
Thoreau, Henry D.: Excursions, Boston.
Tyndale, William : The Obedience of a Christian Man, Parker Soc,
Ed. Walter. Cambridge, 1848.
The Same. Day's ed., 1572.
Walton, Sir Isaac : The Complete Angler, Facsimile of editio
princeps, London, 1876.
Life of Hooker, Editio princeps. London, 1665.
1 84 HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH PARAdRAPH,
Webbe, William ; A Discourse of English Poetrie, Arber reprint,
1870.
Wendell, Barrett: English Composition, New York, 1892.
Wilson, Sir Thomas : The Arte of Rhetorique, Editio princeps,
London, 1553. Owned by F. I. Carpenter, Esq.
Wiclif, John : The English Works 'of Wiclif Hitherto Unpublished,
E. E. T. S. 74. Ed. Matthew.
Wordsworth, William: Prefaces, Ed. George. Boston, 1892.
APPENDIX.
NOTES ON THE VERSE PARAGRAPH IN MIDDLE ENGLISH.
In this dissertation as presented in June, 1894, was included a final
chapter of notes on the development of the paragraph in English verse.
The following pages give such of those notes as pertained to the Mid-
dle-English period. The rest of the original chapter is not printed, but
reserved to form the basis of a fuller treatment at a later day. This
unprinted material includes statistics of the paragraph-length of the
blank verse of Milton, Cowper, Wordsworth, Tennyson, and Browning ;
but the statistics would be but mere lumber here without a more adequate
discussion of the aesthetic question involved than was possible for me to
make. What Professor Corson has done for the " stanza " of Milton's
blank verse should be done for the long poems of all the authors just
mentioned. Careful consideration ought also to be given to the funda-
mental question whether originally the logical unit, the sense unit, had
in literature any strong influence in the development of the rhythmical
unit, the stanza. As a preliminary study I have tried to learn whether
the paragraph-mark had any metrical significance in our older poetry.
The paragraph-mark does not occur in the oldest Anglo-Saxon
poems. Neither is its place supplied by the colored initial, although
colored initials do occur at the beginning of the main divisions. With
the close of the twelfth century, however, we find both initial and mark
used evidently with some metrical significance. To learn how far the
use extends we examine about twenty authors, noting just where the
scribes put paragraph-marks in the MSS.
The Poema Morale,
The Poema Morale (i 170 A. D., Zupitza ; 1 200-1225, Ten Brink) is
written in rhymed septenars. These fall into strophes of four lines
each, each strophe being introduced by a rubricated initial. At least this
is strictly true of the Digby MS. (Bodleian A. 4.) ; the same regularity
does not characterize the Trinity College MS. used by Morris, for here a
rubricated letter often appears, apparently without significance, in the
midst of a strophe.
185
1 86 APPENDIX.
The Omiulum, c. 1200.
The fifteen-syllable lines of the Orviulum are written in the MS.
continuously as in prose, the metrical point being placed at the end of
the fourth foot of each verse. The Omiulum has, however, the para-
graph-mark (see cut, p. II, Fig. 12). The length of the paragraph is
exceedingly variable, depending entirely upon the scribe's rather arbitrary
ideas of the logical divisions and of the emphatic points. The Holt-
White edition gives only the longer logical divisions, disregarding very
many of the MS. marks. In the Holt-White edition, beginning with
the "Dedication," the first 60 paragraphs run as follows with respect to
number of short lines:' 156, 28, 66, 30, 55, 8, 106, 30, 58, 20, 88, 58,
206, 162, 168, 12, 34, 16, 46, 19, 36, 8, 26, 148, 188, 343, 52, 200, 48, 54,
82, 56, 352, 172,46. 56, 93, 80, 82, 20, 116,92, 156, 68, 114,54, 90. 124,
102, 32, 144, 148, 82, 152, 456, 158, 328, 612, 200, 228.
Nothing in these figures points to a strophic grouping ; nor does any-
thing in the verses themselves, although occasionally short passages
are repeated with studied effort at musical effect.
LayamoitsBtut, c. 1205.
Lay anion's Brut is, in all MSS., almost without paragraphing. Both
MSS. used by Madden muster together 14 marks, for the whole 30,000
lines. The signs occur too rarely to have either metrical or structural
meaning, and are merely equivalent to marginal index-figures, pointing
out important things. In MS. Cott. Otho, c. xiii., initials are used to
mark divisions, but the divisions are too long to be considered as para-
graphs.
The Story of Genesis and Exodus, c. 1250.
The song known as the Story of Genesis and Exodus is preserved in
a unique MS. in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. The
MS. is divided by red initials into loi short paragraphs, the brevity of
which is in keeping with the light and easy movement of the poem.
The average number of lines in the paragraph is 40.4, but there is
great variability in the individual sections. I can see no signs of any
strophic arrangement in the rhymed couplets of this poem. The same
rhyme is, however, occasionally continued through several verses.
The paragraphs are respectively of the following numbers of lines :
12, 16, 6, 58, 20, 16, 28, 8, 34, 14, 14, 4, 14, 14, 10, 50, 14, 22, 14, 8, 12, 20,
20, 12, 14, 10, 6, 22, 24, 10, 4, 4, 4, 16, 6, 16, 16, 2, 2, 4, 12, 6, 40, 16, 22,
^ Ormin's long line is printed by White as a couplet.
APPENDIX, 187
8, 104. 12, 10, 6, 72, 12, 42, 42, 28, 86, 14, 26, 36, 12, 58, 16, 34, 8, 24, 8,
4, 16, 18, 60, 6, 20, 34, 20, 46, 116, 14, 26, 6, 8. 24, 26, 4, 10, 6, 28, 16, 26,
I4» 4. 52, 36, 14, 28, 22, 8, 10, 8, 10, 62, 26, 28, 26, 40, 80, 54, 80, 46, 14,
18, 14, 4, 16, 12, 18, 10, 66, 26, 14, 82, 8, 42, 6, 6, 4, 12, 6, 18, 30, 22, 16,
14, 8, 10, 30, 8, 12, 18, 20, 12, 26. 20, 34, 8, 16, 34, 10, 10, 4,- 8, 6, 42, 18,
30, 38, 24, 32, 4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 18, 16, 4, 38, 44, 16, 16, 4, 12,
8, 30, 16, 6, 18, 16, 10, 16, 26, 44, 16, 14, 12, 76, 36, 12, 28, 14, 14, 10, 8,
28, 10, 8.
King HorriyZ, 1280.
King Horn y according to the Cambridge University Library MS.
(Gg. 4.27.2) used by Lumby (E. E. T. S.) falls into seven divisions,
separated by rubrical initials. These divisions are again broken by
paragraph-marks, colored red. The following table exhibits the length
of each paragraph in lines, the paragraphs being grouped in capital
paragraphs, represented here by Roman numerals :
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V,
VI.
VII.
24
16
18
14
38
20
20
52
12
20
28
18
20
18
12
8
10
18
\
44
24
12
12
20
14
32
12
14
4
14
20
8
12
22
12
24
20
16
6
18
44
40
34
10
■»
12
26
12
18
58
70
16
38
16
70
20
10
8
32
28
58
16
26
28
42
10
30
32
Of the (i(i paragraphs only 26 are indivisible by four. This fact,
taken as a hint, leads us to read the text with a view to seeing whether
1 88 APPENDIX,
or not every four lines makes a stadium. The result of our reading helps
us to accept as at least probable the conjecture of the late Dr. Wissman,
that there was an original strophic arrangement by fours. This arrange-
ment seems to have been suggested to Wissman' by the occasional
recurrence of the same rhyme in groups of four : e.g,^ 127-130 ; 227-230,
etc.
Havelok the Dane, c. 1280.
Havelok the Dane (Skeat, E. E. T. S., from the unique MS., Laud.
Misc. 108 Bodl. Lib.) has, if we omit Skeat's conjectured v. 46, 3000
verses, which fall into paragraphs by 96 rubrical initials. The para-
graph-mark is used but once, then introducing the third section, and
employed, I fancy, to avoid a capital thorn. So far as unity of subject
is concerned, the paragraphing is excellently done. The paragraphs are
respectively of the following numbers of lines: 26, 78,' 28, 16^, 12, 22,
20, 6, 16, 14, 20, 20, 6, 26, 16, 10, 20, 6, 34, 10, 39,' 18, 80, 20, 84,
42, 42, 16, 36, 26, 46, 22, 30, 18, 176, 14, 64, 66, 18, 10, 10, 68, 32,
7, 250, 26, 14, 32, 52, 94, 8, 10, 36, 6, 34, 48, 6, 44, 4, 30, 10, 10^
14, 38, 10, 20, 12, 20, 14, 18, 4, 10, 24, 22, 42, 24, 26, 6, 20, 58,24,
54, 54, 16, 118, 24, 10, 20, 30, 12, 6, 72, 14, 6, 14, 16, 24.
Although the large number of sections divisible by four might sug-
gest the presence of strophic arrangement, none such appears on
examination. The poem was not, like Horn^ fitted for musical recita-
tion.
Guy of Warwick, 1 300- 1325.
The various MSS. of Guy of Warwick differ widely in the length of
their main divisions. In the Auchinleck MS. the twelve-line stanzas are
usually introduced by the paragraph-mark. The mark occurs only
three times in the Cambridge Paper MS., namely at lines 7487, 11,267,
11,337. Zupitza, however, in his edition from the MS. last named,
inserts the paragraph-mark many times, in order to break up the long
divisions.
Sir Bevis of Hamtoun, 1300- 132 5.
In the Romance of Sir Bevis of Hamtoun (Auchinleck MS.), the par-
agraph-mark is placed before the third and sixth lines of the six-line
' King Horn. Untersuchungen zur Mittelenglischen Sprach- und Litter a -
turgeschichte, Strassburg, 1876. P. 63.
^Skeat's conjectured line 46 is omitted. At 410, 411, the lines are perhaps
corrupt, for they do not rhyme. This fact may account for the odd number of
lines, 39.
APPENDIX, 189
stanzas, for the first 474 lines. With the 475th line the metre changes
to the couplet, and hereafter the mark subdivides the main sections*
which are marked by initials. I cannot discover that the mark has any
metrical import after 474.
The real paragraphs of the poem are the capital paragraphs (cf. p.
29). The first of these consists of nine six-line stanzas ; the second, of
nine ; the third, of fourteen ; the fourth, of seventeen ; the fifth, of four-
teen ; the sixth, of sixteen. Each group has a certain unity of its own*
The rest of the paragraphs are of varied length and indifferent unity.
They indicate no strophic tendency. The count runs as follows, by
lines : 54, 54, 84, 192, 84, 96, no, 60, 94, 32, 66, 72, 80, 52, 28, 68, 82,
44, 82, 88, 50, 52, 40, 60, no, 136, 78, 188, 62, 42, 30, 184, 68, 64, 2o6»
108, 40, 72, 94, 10.
The Bruce, ^ Q. 1376.
Both the two important MSS. of the Bruce, the Cambridge and the
Edinburgh, show the paragraph- mark ; but the paragraphing does not
agree closely in the two. I cannot see that the mark has any metrical
import in either MS. Pinkerton, who edited the Bruce in 1790, divided
it into twenty books, instead of the long and irregular paragraphs.
Jamieson, 1820, preferred a division into fourteen books; while Inness,
1866, following the MSS., divided his text into paragraphs, 150 in all.
Cursor Mundi,^ 1 4th c.
There is no meaning in the paragraphing of the various MSS. of the
Cursor Mundi, Each successive scribe was positive that the unity of
his predecessors' paragraphs was faulty, and so each placed the marks
differently. Thus, Fairfax MS., 14 Bodleian, has, in the first 1000
verses, twelve capital paragraphs, seventy-one paragraphs. Cotton
Vesp. A iii. Brit. Mus., has, in the first 1000 verses, two capital para-
graphs and five paragraphs. Gottingen MS., theol. 107, has in the first
1000 lines no capital paragraphs, sixteen paragraphs. MS. R. 3. 8.
Trin. Col., Cam., has in the first 1000 lines seven capital paragraphs,
fifty paragraphs.
The Legend of Celestin, c. 1360 (?)
The Legend of Celestin^ (MS. Laud. L 70, fol. n8 b) is written in
^ The Bruce, or The Book of the Most Excellent and Noble Prince, Robert de
Broyss, King of Scots. Ed. Skeat, E. E. T. S.
* Cursor Mundi. Ed. Morris, E. E. T. S.
3 Ed. Horstmann, Auglia, I., p. 67.
IQO APPENDIX,
Strophes of five lines, rhyming a a a b b. The paragraph-mark occurs
only at the beginning of a strophe, thus serving as a metrical index*
But it does not begin every strophe. In the companion piece, Susanna^
the mark introduces each thirteen-line strophe. The capital para-
graphs of the Celestin include respectively the following numbers of
strophes : 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 2, 3, i, 3, 2, 2, 2,
2, I, 3» 2, 3, 3, I, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, I, 3, 2, 2, 3, 2, 3, I, 2, 3, I, 3, 2, 3,
2| 2, 3f 3» 2, 3> 3» 2«
Joseph of Arimathie,^ c. 1350.
In Joseph of Arimathie (Vernon MS. fol. 403) the alliterative verse
is written like prose. The whole poem is, however, marked off into
lines and half-lines by three devices : (a) small capitals ; (p) para-
graph-marks ; {c) metrical dots.
The paragraphs are indicated by capitals. The paragraph- mark
serves two purposes, namely, that of a metrical sign, and that of an
emphasis mark, or index. It is noticeable that these two uses usually
coincide in result, i, e., each paragraph-mark usually notes the beginning
of a line, and at the same time calls attention to something important.
The length of the capital paragraphs is successively as follows, no
strophic tendency appearing: 3,= 16, 17, 16, 11, 10, 14, 20, 8, 20, 38, 6,
31, 16, 30, 19, 18, 18, 21, 29, 19, 32, 36, 22, 17, 29, 37, 51, 9, 4i> 12, 10
12, 20.
The Wars of Alexander?
The Wars of Alexander has 27 passus, the last incomplete. Skeat
reckons a total of 5677 vv. The number of verses to the passus runs
thus: 213, 311, 198, 158, 240, 336, 263, 286, 313, 288, 239, 167, 191,
264, 192, 120, 239, 240, 119, 192, 145, 191, 169, 216, 192, 144, 51
(incomplete). But it must be remembered that in all the alliterative
poems lines were frequently lost in the copying ; thus the following lines
appear in the Dublin MS., but not in the Ashmole : 1633, 1766, 1767,
2168, 2724, 2842, 2980, 3167, 3267, 4002. If we add these missing
lines, our count of verses in the successive passus will stand : 213, 311,
198, 158, 240, 336, 264, 288, 314, 288, 241, 168, 192, 265, 192, 120, 240,
'^Joseph of Arimathie, otherwise called the Romance of the Seint Graal, ed
Skeat, E.E.T.S.
2 The MS. is imperfect before this \
3 The Wars of Alexander, an alliterative romance, translated chiefly from the
Historia Alexandri Magni de Prosliis, ed. Skeat, E.E.T.S.
APPENDIX, 1 9 1
240, 119, 192, 145, 191, 169, 216, 192, 144, 51 (incomplete). Although
this change has made one of the even numbers odd (264-265) it has
greatly raised the sum of evens, which (omitting the incomplete last
passus) now stands 1 8 out of 26, or 69 per cent. This is a curious
thing in verse supposed to be alliterative merely, and not strophic. We
look farther — to the paragraph-marks.
The paragraph-marks are distributed as follows in the Ashmole MS.,
the Roman numeral indicating the passus, the Arabic the number of the
line in the Skeat text :
I. 23, 95, 190.
II. 214, 334, 406, 478.
III. 525-
IV.
V. 881, 905, 1024.
VI. 1121.
VII. 1505.
VIII. 1958.
IX.
X. 2415,2439, 2463.
XI. 2727, 2755, 2775, 2799, 2823.
XII. 2894.
XIII. 3037, 3085,3180.
XIV. 3252, 3299, 3420.
XV. 3540, 3564, 3576.
XVI. 3762.
XVII. 3780.
XVIII. 4163, 421 1, 4235.
XIX. 4259.
XX. 4378.
XXI. 4644, 4692.
XXII. 4715.
XXIII. 4906.
XXIV. 5075, 5103.
XXV. 5291.
XXVI.
XXVII. 5656.
Therefore the numbers of lines per paragraph, by the marks of the
Ashmole, are: 22, 72, 95, 24, 120, 72, 72, 47, 356, 24, 119, 97, 384, 453»
457, 24, 24, 264, 28, 20, 24, 24, 71, 143. 48, 95, 72, 47> 121, 120, 24, 12,
186, 18, 383, 48, 24, 24, 119, 266, 48, 23, 191, 169, 128, 188, 365. If
now we count the initial at the beginning of each pftssus as taking the
192 APPENDIX.
place of the mark, when that is lacking, and if we add in their proper
places the ten extra lines found in the Dublin MS. but lacking in the Ash-
mole, the list just given will stand thus : 22, 72,95, 24, 120, 72, 72, 47, 198,
158, 24, 120, 97, 336, 48, 216, 240, 48, 3U, 96, 24, 24, 144, 121, 28, 20,
24, 24, 24, 48, 120, 24, 48, 96, 24, 48, 48, 121, 48, 72, 24, 12, 84, 102,
18, 240, 144, 48, 24, 24, 119, 192, 74, 48, 23, 191, 169, 28, 188, 192,
144, 29.
The merest glance at these numbers shows that the even ones greatly
predominate. This predominance suggests a possible strophic arrange-
ment. The suggestion is strengthened by several curious things notice-
able in the Ashmole MS. First, of the twenty-seven passus, only ten
begin with the paragraph-mark. These ten are passus ii., iii., v., vi,
xix., XX., xxii., xxiii., xxiv., xxv. Why only ten so begin is not plain ;
of course it may be a matter of chance, but, again, there are three
passus, iv., ix., xxvi., that contain no paragraph-mark at all. I cannot
understand the reason of this, unless it be that the mark was
inserted now and then . merely as a metrical regulator; and I grant
this to be but a poor reason for the omissions.
But at any rate, on the suspicion that the mark means something
metrically, as it did in Joseph of Arimathie^ we look for the smallest
paragraph. It turns out to be one of four lines, Dublin, 2795-2799.
No paragraph smaller than twelve lines occurs in the Ashmole. Using
four as a divisor we discover that 73 per cent, of the paragraphs in the
revised list given above, are divisible. Immediately we begin to read
to see if each four lines form anything like a stadium.
The first paragraph contains twenty-four lines. Its natural subdi-
visions seem to be r-3, 4-7, 8-10, 11-14, 15-18. 19-23. So far, so
good. This paragraph breaks into six divisions of respectively 3, 4, 3,
4, 4, 4, lines. We further discover that the first three lines have /as
the letter of alliteration, the next four have /, the next three have c (^),
the next four «/, the last four r. It would be easy here to say that the
first and third divisions have lost each a line, but the sense is perfect as
the text now stands. We find no other groups of lines with the same
alliteration. As we continue the reading we find that by no means does
every fourth line mark a stadium. We therefore double the number,
and read for groups of eight. The result is surprisingly persuasive that
there is a genuine strophic arrangement by eights. There are indeed
cases where the eighth line does not end a sentence, but the great
majority of these groups of eight do mark real stadia. We may at
APPENDIX. 193
least conclude that there is a strong tendency in this poem to write
alliterative verses in strophes of eight ; but that the rule is not without
many exceptions.
I have tried to test this hypothesis still further by considering the
whole text as divided both by the paragraph-marks of the Ashmole,
and by the initials of the Dublin. The result, however, is not so assur-
ing as the paragraphing of the Ashmole alone. It is entirely possible
that the original poem was divided regularly into eight-line groups,
but in the present state of our knowledge it seems rash to reject so
many good verses and add so many conjectural ones as would be nec-
essary to render all the passus divisible by eight.^
William of Palerne^ c. 1350.
ThQ Romance of William of Palerne is preserved in a unique MS.
in the library of King's College, Cambridge. The paragraphing in this
MS. is done by the use of small blue and red initials. A quire is miss-
ing at the very beginning of the poem, and although Skeat in his E. E.
T. S. reprint of Madden's edition substitutes for the lost lines the original
French, I have begun my count at the first of the English divisions.
The paragraphs run as follows as to number of lines :
78, 29, 52, 9,=" 28, 34, 113, 39, 49 (folio 10 lost) 54 (folio 10 lost)
52,3 42, 49, 102, 119, 38, 79, 74, 26, 24, 27, 61, 75, 162, 20, 100, 53, 49,
66, 60, loi, 65, 122, 91, 72, 63, 36, 51, 84, ii9» 29, 21, 95, 92, 25, 26,
61, 51. 35. 56, 73, 61, 32, 36, 54, 93» 42, 63, 64, 75, 40, 39» 35» 21,
44, 46, 45, 40, 45, 47, 65, 32, 34, 99, 43, 48, 38, 45, 137, 65, 44, 63,
40, 43, 30, 43, 99, 84, 64, 32. 32, 54, 64, 46, 70, 39, U, 20.^
Only 55 per cent, of these numbers are even, a proportion not large
^ After writing this account in August, 1893, I learned that in Englische
Studien (1892) Max Kaluza has discussed Strophische Gliederung in der Mii-
telenglischen rein alliterirenden Dichtung. Kaluza, proceeding from a different
point of view from my own, arrives at the conclusion that the Wars was written
in strophes of 24 ! To reach this conclusion he has to add 83 verses to Skeat's
(and Stevenson's) 5677 verses. This process gives 5760 lines, which is indeed
a multiple of 24, and not only of 24 but of 48 and 72, for that matter. Kaluza
does not utterly ignore the paragraph-mark, though he does ignore the initials
of Dublin. He merely says that the mark stands only tour times in the
midst of a strophe (of 24) : 3576, 3762, 5103, 5655. Surely he must have over-
ooked 2755, to say nothing of many cases in Dublin.
^ These two paragraphs begin with small letters.
3 1 restore a line which Skeat thinks may be lost, at 500.
1 94 APPENDIX.
enough to point to any regular strophic arrangement. The text reveals
here and there a logical unit of four lines, but the grouping was hardly
a conscious one.
The Destruction of Jerusalem.
The Destruction of Jerusalem^ another of the alliterative poems of
this period, is preserved in various MSS. Cotton Caligula A II, is
divided into quatrains by the paragraph-mark, which here becomes
chiefly a metrical sign. The poem is broken into sections by four
divine invocations (vv. 438, 888, 1104, 1332).
The Boke of Curtasye.
The Boke of Curtasye (Sloane MS. 1986, Brit. Mus.) is written in
rhymed couplets. The paragraph-mark indicates a predominating
strophic arrangement in four-line groups. In the third main section,
however, the paragraphing is irregular. The number of lines in the
successive strophes of the whole poem runs as follows : I. 8, 4, 4, 4, 4,
4. 4» 4, 4» 4» 4» 4. 4» 4» 4» 4» 4» 4» 4» 4. 4» 4» 4, 4» 4» 4» 4» 4. 4. 4»
4» 4» 4, 4. I. n. 8, 4, 4. 4» 4, 6, 4, 4, 6, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 8, 6, 6, 4. 6,
6, 4, 4, 6, 4, 8, 4, 4, 10, 4, 4, 6, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 6, 4, 8, 4, 6. III. 10,
18, 16, 10, 6, 12, 8, 4, 12, 7, II, 14, 8, 6, 7, 7, 14, 20, 4, 8, 10, 10, 22,
10, 18, 6, 10, 6, 22, 8, 54, 20, 12, 19, 43, 26.
The Vision of William concerning Piers the Plowman^ 1363.
The mark is occasionally used in the MSS. of Piers the Plowman
with purely metrical meaning. In such cases it is employed, as in
Joseph of Ari?nathie, to divide a long line into two short ones.
The mark is also used in all the MSS. with its usual force, but
without any strophic significance. The paragraphing of the various
MSS. differs. To illustrate : the Vernon MS. has 28 paragraphs in
the second passus (208 lines) while the MS. Phillips 8321 has 10 para-
graphs for the same passus (252 lines). In the third passus (281 lines)
Vernon has 55 paragraphs. For the same passus (349 lines) Laud. 851
has 58 paragraphs. Of the three MSS. mentioned, the Vernon is the
most justly divided, the Phillips least. The MS. of Trin. Col. Cam.
(13 1 5. 1 7) has perhaps the shortest paragraphs of all. Laud., Rawlin-
son (Poet. 38. Bodl.), Trin. Col., and others, have breaks between para-
graphs, a device which of course adds to the beauty and legibility of
the page. MS. Bodley 814, Oxford, is of early date, but shows no inter-
paragraphic breaks.
APPENDIX.
^95
The Destruction of Troy.
The alliterative romance of the Destruction of Troy (E. E. T. S. 39
and 36, Panton & Donaldson) is from a unique MS. in the Hunterian
Museum of the University of Glasgow. The paragraph-mark is not
used in this MS. and the divisions indicated by initials are rather too
long to be called paragraphs. These divisions are however often
broken up into paragraphs by spacing and the insertion of an explana-
tory phrase, e. g. "The Onsuare of Jason to Medea."
The Staciouns of Rome ^ c. 1460.
In the Staciouns of Rome Utit. real paragraphs are indicated by rubrical
initials. About one-half of these capital paragraphs are subdivided,
and very skillfully, by the marks — alternately red and blue. I fail to
discover any strophic arrangement beyond the rhymed couplet. The
following table exhibits the length, in lines, of the sub-paragraphs, each
brace equaling a capital paragraph.
\ 10
( 10 ( 18 ( 12 ( 22 ( 12 ( 20 ( 16 ( II
\
16 f 8
^ 8
20
8
18
10
4
4
4
4
4
2
2
4
( 20 ( 12 ( 14 ( 10 ( 4 \ 12
?I4( ( ^2? ?
8
16
2
4
2
^ :
2
22
6
( 16 ( 12 ( 6 ( 4 ( 14 ( 12 U < 24 ( 18 ( 6 ( 8 ( 10 ( 10 ( 8 ( 8 ( 12 ( 10
\8
\
Morte Arthure,
In the Thornton MS. the Morte Arthure is broken into 80 para-
graphs by initials. The length of these paragraphs by lines is respec-
tively as follows : 25, 52, 3, 8, 50, 65, 57, 16, 33, 45, 25, 108, 7, 32, 16,
196 APPENDIX,
40, 15, 54, 14, 43. 486, 395, 20, 8, 42, 37, M, 92, 14, 26, 22, 20, 8, 26,
27, 33» 26, 63, 28, 167, 40, 12, 29, 45, 48, 37, 24, 143, 84, 73, 26, 65,
46, 27, 12, 31, 52, 44, 22, 26, 30, 132, 118, 31, 16, 88, 189, 33, 27, 24,
55, 13, 17, 26, 22, 28, 35, 53, 42, 107, 85.
Although the 80 paragraphs average 54.3 lines, there is wide fluctua-
tion in length — 8-486. Of the 80 paragraphs 24 are numerically divisible
into strophes of four lines. We examine these to see if the division is
anything more than a numerical one. By altering occasionally the
punctuation of Perry (E. E. T. S.) we reach the following subdivisions,
each of which may be said to form a minor stadium.
\ V. 62-v. 77 = 52=8+8+4+4+4+8+8+4+4.
1[ V. 288-v. 308 = 16=4+4+4+4.
t V. 522-v. 553=32=8+8+4+8+4.
11 V. 554-v: 569=16=4+8+4.
1[v. 570-v. 609=40=8+4+4+4+8+4+4+4,
\ V. 1617-V. 1636 = 20=4+12+4.
1[ V. 1637-V. 1644 = 8=8.
II V. 1912-V. 1919=8 = 4+4.
t V. 2290-v. 2329=40=4+4+4+4+8+6+4+6.
t V. 2330-V. 2341 = 12 = 8+4.
1[ V. 2416-V. 2463=48 ^4+4+4+4+6+10+8+8.
\ V. 2525-v. 2668=143=4+4+4+4+4+4+4+4+8+4+10+6+4+6
+7+4+8+6+4+4+4+4+10+4+8+4+6.
H V. 2669-v. 2752 = 84=4-1-6+4+4+6+6+4+8+4+6+5+10+12+5.
If V. 2990-V. 3001 = 12=12.
t V. 3033-v. 3084=52=4+4+4+4+6+8+4+4+6+8.
H V. 3085-v. 3128=44=4+4+4+4+6+4+8+6+4.
H V. 3488-v. 3503=16=16.
t V. 3504-v. 3591=88 = 6+6+8+4+8+8+6+8+4+4+4+6+4+4+4
+4.
If V. 3841-V. 3864=24=4+4+4+4+4+4.
II V. 3998-v. 4025 = 28=12+4+12.
t V. 4263-v. 4348=85 = 13+16+4+4+4+4+4+3+^2+6+10+5.
It is evident hat there is a strong tendency toward a strophe of
four lines. But the poet does not hesitate to alternate with this
quatrain groups of six, or eight, or even sixteen verses, or again certain
irregular groups of odd numbers. The paragraphs that are not evenly
divisible by four show about the same proportion of four-line groups.
For example the ^ 2525-2668=144—1^=143 gives the following
^ Perry has unquestionably missed his count at 2592.
APPENDIX.
197
groups : 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4» 8, 4, 10, 6, 4, 6, 7, 4, 8, 6. 4, 4, 4, 4, 10,
4, 8, 4, 6.
Chaucer,
The MSS. of Chaucer vary greatly in their paragraphing. The
Ellesmere MS. uses both initials and paragraph-marks. In the Pro-
logue the initials are used almost exclusively. Later on the initial
seems to be used as marking a more important division than the ^, but
it is not plain that the capital paragraphs form organized wholes of
which the ^ marks subdivisions. The Petworth MS. likewise shows
both initial and ^, the former less rarely than the latter, and less rarely
than the initial in Ellesmere. On the other hand the Hengwrt, Cam-
bridge, Corpus, and Lansdowne MSS. use the ^ regularly and the
initial rarely. In Ellesmere it often happens that where an initial
stands in the text, the \ occurs opposite to the initial in the margin,
and precedes a marginal note.
The following table shows the distribution of paragraph-marks and
initials, in the Prologue and the Knight's Tale, for the three MSS.,
Ellesworth, Petworth, and Lansdowne. No particular value is
claimed for the table, except as it shows how nearly all the scribes
pitched on the important points, while differing widely concerning
the minor subdivisions. Except in the case of Ellesmere, where
initials are marked C, I have not distinguished between capital
and ^. The figures are the numbers of lines in the Furnivall six-text
edition.
Ellesmere. Petworth. Lansdowne.
Ellesmere.
Petworth.
Lansdowne.
c I
I
I
c 19
• •
« •
c 35
• •
• •
c 43
43
43
51
51
• •
73
• •
• •
c 79
79
• •
C TOI
lOI
lOI
c 118
118
118
c 166
165
163
c 208
208
208
c 270
270
270
c 285
285
285
c 309
309
309
c
331
331
331
c
361
361
361
c
379
379
379
c
388
388
388
c
411
411
411
c
445
445
445
c
477
477
477
c
529
529
529
c
542
542
542
545
545
« •
c
567
567
« •
c
587
587
587
c
623
623
623
c
669
669
669
196
APPENDIX,
Ellesmere.
Petworth.
Lansdowne.
Ellesmere.
Petworth.
Lansdowne
c 715.
715
715
1337
• •
• •
747
747
743
C
1347
1347
1347
769
769
769
C
1355
1355
1355
783
784
• «
1361
• •
788
788
1380
• •
1380
810
810
1399
« •
1393
817
• •
C
1451
1451
I451
829
• •
1459
• •
« •
« •
837
837
1462
1462
1462
859
859
859
1469
• •
• •
875
• •
• •
1475
1475
• •
c 893
893
893
1488
1488
1488
905
• •
« •
C
I491
« •
• •
912
• «
915
■ •
1497
« •
931
• •
• •
• •
1519
• •
952
952
952
1528
« •
• •
c 975
• •
975
1540
1540
1540
981
• •
• •
• •
1559
■ «
lOOI
• •
« •
1574
1577
1574
1005
« •
• ■
1596
1596
1 596
• •
• •
1025
1620
• •
• •
1033
• •
• •
C
1623
1623
1624
• •
1049
1049
1649
'• •
• ■
« •
• •
1056
1661
• •
. .
1092
« •
1092
C
1663
1663
• •
1 123
• •
1112
1673
• •
. .
1126
. .
• •
1683
• •
• •
1128
• •
• •
1696
• •
1690
1152
• •
1152
1714
1713
1714
« •
• •
1 162
1742
• •
1742
c 1 187
• •
1 187
1748
» •
• •
1209
• •
• «
1785
• «
1785
I2I9
« •
• •
1799
• •
• •
• •
. .
1234
C
1829
• .
1829
I25I
• «
• •
C
1845
1845
1845
1275
• •
1275
1853
• •
• •
• •
• «
1295
1870
• •
■ •
1303
• .
1303
1881
1881
• •
I3I3
• «
1313
1893
• «
• •
• •
1325
• •
1895
• «
• •
1334
• •
1334
1914
• •
• •
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11